T>. 


'-> 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 

GIFT  OF 


y'fi. 


K.    D.    KIRSDIiv:AJ^i 


^/ 


'O  H^-c-  rc^- 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcliive 

in  2007  witli  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/doctrineofcliurcliOOprotiala 


THE   DOCTRINE 

'^  OF 

The  Church  of  England 


THE  NATURE  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN 
MINISTRY, 


TB8TED    BY    THE    WRITINGS    OF    THE    REFORMERS    AND 

OTHER  READING  DIVINES  FROM  THE  SIXTEENTH 

CENTURY   TO   THE   PRESENT   TIME. 

WITH    AN    ESSAY    ON    THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    THE    NEW 

TESTAMENT 

AND   TWO   LETTERS   FROM    IJISHOP    WHITE. 


COMPILKO  AND  PRINTED  FOR  THE 
/PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL  SOCIETY  FOR  THE  PROMOTION 
1  OF  EVANGELICAL  KNOWLEDGE. 


NEW   YORK 
No.  2  UiBLE  House. 


}3  V 

CONTENTS. 
— •  •  • — 

Page 

INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY  ON  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 5 

I. 

TESTIMONY  OF  BISHOP  WHITE,  IN  TWO  LETTERS  TO 
DR.  HOBART 31 

II. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  REFORMERS  AND  MARTYRS- 
CnANMER— RiDi^Y— Latimek— Ttnualk— Becon  —  Brad- 
ford— Philpot— Hutchinson, 73 

|III. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  LEADING  ELIZABETHAN  DIVINES 
—CovERDAi-E— Sandys— PiLKiNOTON— Address  to  the 
Queen  against  Altars— Jewel— Hooker— Whitgift,    .    87 

IV. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DIVINES  OF  THE  SEVENTEENTH  AND 
EIGHTEENTH  CENTURIES  —  Hales-Stillingfleet— 
Leighton— Blrnet— Wake— Waterland,   ....    99 

V. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DIVINES  OF  THE  PRESENT  CENTURY 
—  Arnold  —  Whately  —  Thirlwall  —  Lightfoot  —  Pe- 
ROWNE— Jacok 113 

APPENDIX. 
Bishop  Lee's  Essay  on  tue  Ministry, 1C9 


546719 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 


It  must  be  evident  to  every  discriminating 
mind,  tliat  the  essential  fibre  of  tliat  Romaniz- 
ing doctrine  wbicli  is  so  boldly  thrusting  itself 
forward  in  all  branches  of  the  Anglican  com- 
munion, is  the  notion  that  the  Christian  minis- 
ter is  a  priest,  endowed  with  strictly  sacerdotal 
functions  and  standing  as  a  mediator  between 
the  people  and  God.*  The  doctrines  of  au- 
ricular confession,  and  of  the  true  and  proper 
sacrifice  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  draw  their  nutri- 
ment from  this.  Indeed,  the  existence  of  the 
system  which  is  ])opularly  known  as  Kitualism, 
would  be  impossible,  if  this  notion  of  a  caste  of 
sacerdotal  priests  were  effectually  eliminated. 

*  "  There  is  a  complete  difTerence  of  conception  as  to 
the  position  of  the  clergy  and  the  nature  of  the  powers 
which  tiiey  claim,  accordini;-  as  wc  do  or  do  not  regard 
them  as  having  tlie  '  priestly  character. '  And  this  I  take 
it  is  the  real  question  we  have  now  to  face  in  the  ("iiurch 
of  England.  Ail  the  other  ((uestions  which  have  of  late 
been  debated  with  so  much  heat  and  acrimony  .  .  . 
after  all  only  ma.sk  the  real  (|Ucstion. " — C.vnon  Peuowne. 


6  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

The  citations  contained  in  the  following 
pages  go  far  to  show  that  the  above  view  of 
the  powers  and  functions  of  the  Christian  min- 
istry is  an  alien  and  an  intruder  in  the  Angli- 
can Church,  that  it  gained  no  footing  in  the 
Church  until  the  time  of  Archbishop  Laud, 
and  that  it  is,  moreover,  at  variance  with  the 
theology  of  many  of  our  best  divines  since 
that  period. 

The  strong  and  clear  testimony  of  Bishop 
White  is  put  in  the  forefront  of  this  Catena, 
because  the  deliberate  judgment  of  the  most 
illustrious  of  the  fathers  of  our  American 
Cliurch  cannot  but  have  great  weight  with  all 
sober- minded  Churchmen. 

A  brief  statement  of  the  argument  from  the 
!New  Testament  may  form  an  appropriate  in- 
troduction to  the  Testimonies  which  follow. 
The  real  question  at  issue,  let  it  be  borne  in 
mind,  is  simply  this  :  Is  the  Christian  minister 
a  priest  in  the  same,  or  a  similar,  sense  that  the 
Levitical  priest  was  '.  Does  he  stand  between 
the  people  and  God  as  a  necessary  medium  ? 
Is  his  office  vicariaJ,  or  only  representative  ? 
Is  his  function  absolute  and  indispensable  '. 

Now,  when  we  open  the  Xew  Testament 
we  look  in  vain  for  any  hint  that  the  Christian 
minister  succeeds  to  the  powers  and  functions 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  7 

of  the  Jewish  priest,  or  to  any  similar  ones. 
Two-and-thirty  times  is  the  word  Hiereus 
{priest)  used  in  the  ISTew  Testament,  but  never 
once  is  it  employed  to  designate  the  ministers 
■of  the  Gospel.  They  are  called  ' '  prophets, ' ' 
"  evangelists,"  "pastoi-s,"  "  teachers,"  "  min- 
isters, "  "  heralds, "  "  ambassadors, ' '  but  never 
''priests."*  Not  only  so,  but  the  inspired 
■WTiters  carefully  avoid  the  use  of  the  word, 
where  the  connection  would  have  led  them  to 
employ  it,  at  least  in  a  figurative  sense.  Thus 
St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  ix.  13)  says  :  "  Do  ye  not 
know  that  they  which  minister  about  holy 
things  live  of  the  things  of  the  temple,  and 
they  which  wait  at  the  altar  are  partakers  w\i\\ 
the  altar?"  Now,  if  the  apostle  had  held 
with  our  sacerdotalists,  it  would  have  been 
easy  for  him  to  apply  his  argument  in  such 
fashion  as  this  :  "  Even  so  the  Lord  hath  or- 
dained that  Christian  priests  who  wait  at  the 
altar  of  the  new  dispensation  should  be  partak- 
ers with  the  altar"  (viz.,  of  the  "  alms"  which 
the  "  priests"  ''  offer"  on  the  "  altar").  But 
he  carefully  sliuns  such  language,  and  gives  a 

*  "  It  has  been  reckoned,"  says  Canon  Perowne,  "  that 
there  are  no  less  than  one  hundred  and  forty  of  such 
references  [viz.,  to  priests  or  a  priesthood]  in  the  Acts 
aad  Epistles." 


8  INTRODUCTORY  E88AT. 

totally  different  turn  to  the  sentence,  viz.  : 
"  Even  so  hath  the  Lord  ordained  that  they 
which  preach  the  Gospel  should  live  of  the 
Gospel"  (v.  14). 

It  is  alleged,  however,  that  we  have  an  ex- 
ception to  the  above  statement  in  a  passage 
from  St.  Paul  (Eom.  xv.  16)  where  he  speaks 
of  himself  as  "  ministering  as  a  priest  {ispovp- 
yovvTo)  the  Gospel  of  God,  that  the  offer- 
ing up  of  the  Gentiles  might  be  acceptable." 
Now,  it  is  perfectly  true  that  this  word  (which 
is  a  ocTtaS  Xsyojuevov  in  the  New  Testament) 
signifies  here,  as  in  Josephus,  Philo,  and  pro- 
fane authors  genei'ally,  to  "  do  the  work  of  a, 
priest."  But,  as  Tholuck  well  points  out, 
while  the  Je^^^sh  priests  clean  the  altar,  kin- 
dle the  fire,  slay  the  victim,  and  then  present 
it  to  God,  the  sole  priestly  office  of  the  apostle 
consists  in  proclaiming  the  Gospel,  and  the 
Gentiles  are  the  oblation  which  follows.  He 
does  not  represent  himself  as  offering  a  sacri- 
fice yor  the  people — as  the  eucharist  for  in- 
stance— but  as  offering  the  people  themselves 
as  a  sacritice  to  God. 

To  serve  the  purposes  of  our  opponents' 
argument,  this  priestly  administration  of  the 
apostle  should  be  peculiar  to  his  office  as  a 
minister  of  Christ.     That  this  is  not  tlie  case 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  9 

is  evident  from  tlie  circumstance  that  in  an- 
other place  in  this  epistle  he  exhorts  the  laity  to 
do  the  very  same  thing,  viz.,  to  "  offer  a  liv- 
ing sacrifice"  (Rom.  xii.  1  ;  see  also  Phil, 
ii.  17).  In  this  sense  it  may  be  admitted  that 
St.  Paul  was  a  priest,  but  in  this  sense  all 
Christians  are  priests  as  well.  It  follows  that 
the  passage  in  question  lends  no  support  to 
the  sacerdotal  theory,  and  nmst  be  pronounced 
irrelevant  to  the  discussion.  Dea)i  Alford 
thus  comments  upon  it  :  "  The  language  is 
evidently  figurative,  and  can  by  no  possibility 
be  taken  as  a  sanction  for  any  view  of  the 
Christian  minister  as  a  sacrijicing pynest  other- 
wise than  according  to  tliat  figure,  viz.,  that 
he  oifei*s  to  God  the  acceptable  sacrifice  of 
those  who  by  his  means  believe  on  Christ." 
It  remains  true,  then,  that  neither  the  woi'd 
"  priest  "  (tepsvs)  nor  any  of  its  derivatives 
{lepaTSia,  lepocrsvfxa,  lepaTiDoo,  lepovpyioj) 
are  ever  used  in  the  Xew  Testament  to  de- 
scribe the  peculiar  functions  of  the  Christian 
ministry. 

!Now  it  will  not  do  to  reply,  as  Sadler  and 
others  do,  that  this  is  a  question  not  of  niimoi, 
but  of  tJiings,  and  lience  that  ''  it  matters  not 
a  straw  whether  tlie  name  of  ])nt'sts  were 
given"   to  Christian  ministers  or  no  ;  for,  as 


10  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

the  Bishop-elect  of  Durham  well  says,  ' '  Words 
express  things,  and  the  silence  of  the  apostles 
still  requires  an  explanation."  If  it  indeed 
pertain  to  our  ministry  to  offer  sacrifice  for 
the  people  or  to  "  dispense  the  benefits  of  the 
atonement"  in  any  exclusive  and  peculiar 
sense,  we  cannot  but  join  ^"ith  honest  old  Lati- 
mer when  he  said,  "  I  can  never  wonder 
enough  that  Peter  and  all  the  apostles  would 
forget  thus  negligently  the  ofiice  of  sacrificing, 
if  they  had  thought  it  necessary. ' '  We  find 
not  a  little  in  the  New  Testament  about  "  sac- 
rifices" and  "  offerings,"  but  the  laity  as  well 
as  the  clergy  are  said  to  present  them.  The 
whole  body  of  believers  is  by  St.  Peter  de- 
clared to  be  a  royal  priesthood  to  offer  up 
"spiritual  sacrifices."  To  this  it  is  no  suffi- 
cient reply  to  allege  that  the  same  privileges 
were  conferred  upon  the  Jews  when  the  Lord 
said  by  Moses  unto  them,  "  Ye  shall  be  to  me 
a  kingdom  of  priests,  and  a  holy  nation, ' '  and 
thence  to  argue  that  "  the  fact  that  all  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  of  Christ  are  priests  of  God, 
does  not  for  a  moment  clash  with  another  fact, 
that  God  selects  a  certain  order  of  men  out  of 
His  Church  and  makes  them  priests  in  a  spe- 
cial sense"  (Sadler,  p.  216)  ;  for  in  the  one 
case  the  priestly  functions  of  the  nation  were 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  11 

concentrated  in,  and  coniined  to,  a  definitelj 
appointed  order  ;  and  so  far  as  tlie  people  at 
large  were  concerned,  their  priesthood  was  in 
abeyance  until,  by  the  coming  of  the  Messiah, 
the  way  into  the  holiest  should  be  opened  ; 
whereas  in  the  other  case  there  is  no  record  of 
any  order  of  priests,  l)ut,  on  the  contrary,  an 
assurance  that  now  the  promise  made  to  the 
fathers  was  realized,  and  the  tohole  people  con- 
stituted a  priesthood.  And  even  though  it 
were  admitted  that  the  universal  priesthood  of 
believers  does  not  necessarily  clash  with  a  spe- 
cial priesthood,  it  remains  true  that  the  New 
Testament  recognizes  the  former,  but  not  the 
latter  ;  and  not  only  so,  ])ut,  as  we  shall  pres- 
ently see,  it  teaches  us  that  the  special  order  of 
priesthood  has  found  its  fultilment  and  absorp- 
tion in  the  one  great  Priest,  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  However,  whatever 
view  may  be  taken  of  the  joassage  from  Exodus 
just  quoted,  this  much  cannot  be  denied  ; — 
that  when  the  hi-aeJite  had  fallen  into  siu — 
<?.^. ,  falseliood,  perjury,  violence — he  could 
only  obtain  forgiveness  through  the  interveu- 
tion  of  the  priest  ;  he  Avas  required  to  l)ring 
his  trespa^^s  offering  to  the  priest  tliut  lii'  might 
^^  iiKihe  (liinicmm^t  fur  li'nn'  {\a'.\.  vi.).  But 
tike  Chrht'ion  is  permitted  direct  access  to  the 


12  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

Father  witliout  any  priestly  intervention.  He 
has  "  boldness"  to  "  enter  into  the  holiest  by 
the  blood  of  Jesus" — to  enter  as  a  consecrated 
priest  and  offer  the  blood  of  Christ  as  an  atone- 
ment for  his  sin. 

The  advocates  of  the  sacerdotal  theory,  Iioav- 
ever,  endeavor  to  break  the  force  of  the  argu- 
ment from  the  silence  of  the  Kew  Testament 
writers,  by  citing  as  a  parallel  their  usage  in 
regard  to  the  word  ''  Sabbath."  This  word 
occurs  much  more  frequently  in  the  l^ew 
Testament  than  the  word  "  priest  ;"  but  it  is 
never  once  employed  to  designate  the  Lord's 
Day.  And  yet,  say  these  Laudians — convert- 
ed, sti'angely  enough,  for  the  time  into  Sab- 
batarians— Avho  will  deny  that  there  is  a  Chris- 
tian Sabbatli  (  Even  so  there  is  a  Christian 
priesthood,  notwithstanding  the  silence  of  the 
]S^ew  Testament  writers  upon  the  subject. 

We  reply  :  To  use  such  an  argument  is  to 
illustrate  that  wliich  is  plain  and  clear  by  that 
which  is  dark  and  difficult.  Upon  few  sub- 
jects has  there  been  more  controversy,  and 
more  wide  divergence  of  opinion,  than  upon 
the  Sabbatical  question.  Many,  as  Dean  Al- 
ford  and  Dr.  Plessey,  would  answer  :  The  rea- 
son why  the  Lord's  Day  is  not  called  the  Sab- 
bath is  because  the  Sabbath  is  al)olished  ;  and 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  13 

our  Sunday  or  Lord's  Day  is  not  the  Sabbath. 
And  a  large  class  of  writers,  who  would  not  go 
so  far  as  that,  would  yet  insist  tliat  the  spirit 
of  the  Lord's  Day  is  essentially  different  from 
that  of  the  Sabbath.  Even  Hooker  was  of 
opinion  that  the  Jewisli  Sabbatli  was  probably 
observed  as  a  fast. 

But  even  if  we  grant  tlie  inference  from 
the  supposed  parallel,  that  as  there  is  an 
analogy  between  the  Lord's  Day  and  the 
Jewish  Sabl)ath,  so  there  is  an  analogy  be- 
tween the  Christian  ministry  and  the  Jewish 
priesthood,  the  crucial  question  yet  remains,-  — 
In  lahat  sense  and  how  far  are  they  analogous  f 
— a  question  which  must  be  determined  inde- 
pendently and  upon  its  own  merits,  and  may 
receive  very  different  answers  in  the  tAVO 
cases.  Hooker  admitted  a  certain  analogy 
or  proportion  between  the  otHce  of  the  Jewish 
priest  and  that  of  the  Christian  minister,  and 
yet  he  empliatically  declares  that  "  sacritice  is 
now  no  part  of  the  cJiurch  ministry"'  (v.  "8,  2), 
and  that  "  tlie  word  prexhijfer  dotli  seem 
more  tit  and  in  pi-()j)rietv  of  speech  moi-c 
agreeable  than  priest,  with  the  drift  of  the 
whole  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ"  [v.  7S,  ;|). 
And  Archbishop  Loighton  himself  s}>eaks  of 
an  analogous  dignity  between  '*  tlie  ministry 


14  INTROD  UCTOR  Y  E8SA  T. 

of  the  Gospel ' '  and  ' '  the  priesthood  of  the 
law  ;"  and  yet  he  holds  that  "  the  external 
priesthood  of  the  law  is  abolished  by  the  com- 
ing of  this  great  High  Priest, — Jesus  Christ 
being  the  body  of  all  those  shadows"  (Comm. 
on  1  Peter  ii.  9). 

Equally  futile  is  the  reason  given  by  writers 
of  this  school  for  the  silence  of  the  New 
Testament  writers.  "While,"  says  Mr.  Car- 
ter, "  there  was  danger  to  be  apprehended 
from  Jewish  ideas  becoming  attached  to  the 
new  system,  from  mere  confusion,  or  from 
the  appearance  of  antagonism,  the  Jewish 
terms  were  suspended,  though  the  ideas 
of  priesthood  and  Sabbath  passed  into  the 
Christian  system,  and  when  this  danger  no 
longer  existed,  and  the  separation  of  the  two 
systems  was  complete,  the  terms  themselves 
were  again  freely  used"  (Doc.  of  the  Priest- 
hood, p.  122).  This  explanation  has  not  even 
the  merit  of  being  plausible.  For,  so  far  from 
creating  "  confusion,''''  it  would  have  mani- 
festly made  the  Gospel  system  seem  plainer  to 
the  Jew  to  tell  him  that  though  the  Jewish 
priesthood  was  abolished,  yet  it  was  replaced 
by  another  order  of  priests  under  the  new  Dis- 
pensation. St.  Paul  has  told  us  that  he  was 
all  things  to  all  men  that  he  might  win  some. 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  15 

To  the  Jews  lie  became  as  a  Jew.  Now,  hav- 
ing taught  them  that  the  Le\'itical  system  was 
ready  to  "  vanisli  away"  (Ileb.  viii.  13),  how 
natural  and  proper  an  accommodation  to  their 
prejudices  it  would  have  been  to  show  that 
the  new  covenant  offered  a  human  j^riesthood 
as  well  as  the  old  ;  that  the  Jew  could  still 
have  an  earthly  mediator  standing  at  an  earth- 
ly altar,  to  whom  he  could  bring  his  "  gifts 
and  sacrifices,"  and  to  whom  he  could  look,  as 
before  to  the  Aaronic  priests,  to  make  inter- 
cession for  him  !  How  it  would  have  softened 
the  opposition  of  the  Jew  to  the  Christian  sys- 
tem if  the  apostle  could  have  said,  "While 
the  Temple  stands  and  the  Aaronic  priests 
continue  to  offer  the  daily  sacrilice,  we  will 
not  call  the  ministers  of  the  new  dispensation 
'  priests,'  but  they  really  are  priests  ;  and 
wlien  the  temple  service  is  finally  abolished, 
then  Christians  will  have  an  order  of  men 
to  stand  at  their  altars  and  make  intercession 
for  them  and  perform  every  office  of  sacer- 
dotal function  possible  on  earth."  In  short, 
if  St.  Paul  could  have  tuuglit  the  sacerdotal 
theory  as  ex])Ounded  by  Sadler  and  his  school, 
it  is  a  marvel  that  he  did  not  teach  it  ;  for, 
making  tlie  Christian  ministry  a  peri)etuation 
of  the   essential    priiici])les   of   the    Levitical 


16  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

priesthood,  as  that  theory  does,  it  would  have 
been  admirably  adapted  to  remove  the  preju- 
dices of  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  to  a  religion 
which  else  offered  neither  priest  not  altar  nor 
victim  on  earth,  and  was  for  that  very  reason 
contrary  to  the  ideas  which  to  them  were  most 
familiar  and  most  dear. 

It  may  further  be  asked  why  St.  John,  who 
lived  more  than  twenty  years  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jemsalem  and  the  consequent  final 
abolition  of  the  Jewish  priesthood,  did  not 
supply  the  sad  omission  of  the  rest  of  the  Xew 
Testament  writers  upon  this  momentous  sub- 
ject of  the  nature  of  the  Christian  ministry  ? 
Surely  there  was  no  longer  occasion  to  keep 
back  the  truth  "  in  order  to  avoid  confusion  I" 
There  were  no  longer  Jewish  priests,  altai"s, 
or  sacrifices  with  which  their  Christian  coun- 
terparts could  be  confounded.  But  neither  in 
his  epistles  not  in  the  Apocalypse  (both  written 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem)  is  there  any 
correction  of  that  view  of  the  Christian  minis- 
try whicli  would  naturally  be  derived  from  the 
rest  of  the  ^^ew  Testament. 

We  are  not,  however,  left  by  the  inspired 
writers  to  frame  our  omu  explanation  of  the 
silence  which  the  strained  hypothesis  just  ad- 
verted to  seeks  to  account  for.     The  Epistle 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  17 

to  the  Hebrews  supplements  and  interprets 
that  silence,  and  effectually  disposes  of  Mr. 
Carter's  argument.  The  object  of  that  book 
may  be  summarily  defined  to  be  the  exhibition 
of  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the  Mosaic  econ- 
omy and  its  consequent  abolition.  As  the 
shadow  gives  place  to  the  substance,  as  the 
flower  falls  off  to  make  way  for  the  fruit,  as 
the  starlight  fades  before  advancing  daylight, 
so  the  writer  sliows  that  the  Levitical  system 
and  the  priesthood  as  part  of  it  "  decayed  " 
and  "  vanished  away"  wlien  in  the  fulness  of 
time  the  Gospel  was  brought  in.  Now  if  we 
turn  to  the  seventh  cliapter  of  that  epistle  we 
find  an  account  of  the  abolition  of  the  Leviti- 
cal priesthood  because  of  its  "  imperfection." 
But  are  we  told  that  it  is  replaced  by  a  Chris- 
tian 2>riesthoo(l  f  Not  at  all.  The  inspired 
writer  informs  us  that  the  '"''  lyrieHtlioocV^  gave 
place  to  a  '^  j^^'^^'^^'^  ('^'-  H)-  ^^^  speaks  of  many 
priests  under  the  law,  l)ut  makes  mention  of 
only  One  under  tlie  Gospel.  Tliroughout  tlie 
epistle  he  contrasts  this  One  priest  and  His 
office  with  the  oiuhr  of  priests  and  tlieir  min- 
istrations under  tlie  Law  ;  shows  witli  elul)oi"ate 
care  that  all  tlieolHces  and  ministrations  of  the 
Levitical  priests  met  tlieir  fuUihiu-nt  in  tlie 
offices  of  Christ  ;  and  nowlierc  hints  anything 

9 


18  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

about  any  other  priest  under  the  GospeL  Thu& 
(v.  11)  :  "  If  perfection  were  by  the  Levitical 
priesthood,  .  .  .  what  f urtlier  need  that  anoth- 
er j!?r^(?5^  should  arise  ?"  Again  (v.  21):  "Those 
priests  were  made  without  an  oath,  but  this 
with  an  oath.  ,  .  .  TAoi/ art  a  priest  forever. " 
Still  more  strongly  (v.  23,  24)  :  "  They  truly 
were  many  priests,  because  they  were  not 
suffered  to  continue  by  reason  of  death  ;  but 
this  man  .  .  .  hath  an  unchangeable  (untrans- 
ferable) priesthood."  But  the  argument  i& 
rendered  conclusive  and  unanswerable  when 
we  note  that  the  priesthood  of  Christ  is  again 
and  again  declared  to  be  "  after  the  order  of 
Melchisedek,"  who  is  described  as  "having 
neither  beginning  of  days  nor  end  of  life,"  as 
"one  that  abideth  a  priest  continually,"  and 
hence  has  no  successor  in  his  office.  Indeed, 
there  are  only  two  orders  of  priests  mentioned 
in  the  Bible  as  of  di\ane  appointment — the 
order  of  xVaron  and  the  order  of  Melchisedek. 
The  former  is  abolislied,  the  latter  is  filled  by 
Christ,  and  there  is  no  hint  of  any  creature 
being  His  jxirtner  in  it,  as  it  is  expressly  de- 
clared that  he  has  no  successor. 

To  what  order  of  priesthood,  then,  do  the 
ministers  of  the  Gospel  belong  ?  And  where 
is  the  record  of  their  appointment  (     Where 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  19 

is  tlie  prescription  of  their  priestly  functions  ? 
Even  Christ  glorified  not  himself  to  be  made 
an  liigh-})riest.  Shall  men,  then,  assume  this 
office  to  tliemselves  without  express  warrant  of 
Holy  Writ  i 

To  Avhat  has  Ijeen  said  above  of  tlie  scope  of 
the  Ei)istle  to  tlie  Hel)rews — that  "Commen- 
tary on  Leviticus  " — let  us  add  the  words  of  a 
learned  English  divine.  "  The  whole  of  the 
Jewish  ceremonial  law  was  of  a  ty])ical  charac 
ter  and  prefigured  the  work  and  -offices  of  the 
Savioui'  who  was  to  eoTue;  The  legal  sacrifices 
pointed  to  the  one  great  sacrifice  to  be  offered 
upon  the  cross.  Tlie  Levitical  })n'esthood  was 
a  type  of  the  heavenly  pi'iesthood  of  Christ. 
He  it  is,  the  object  both  of  type  and  prophecy, 
who  is  the  true  })riest  and  mediator  between 
God  and  man.  Through  Him  all  (/hristians 
have  direct  and  immediate  access  to  God.  As 
we  need  not,  so  we  have  not,  any  other  priest, 
any  other  advocate  with  the  Father.  For  the 
antitype  being  come,  the  reality  supersedes  the 
figure"  (Litton's  Church  of  Christ,  j).  412). 

When  the  true  ])nest  had  (itrered  the  true 
sacrifice,  of  which  all  priesthood  and  sacri- 
fice in  the  Jewish  ritual  were  but  tlie  symbol 
and  the  shadow,  there  was  an  end  of  all  mere 
typical  or  representative  priestlujod  and  sacri- 


20  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

fice.  From  the  moment  of  the  triumphant  cry 
of  the  djing  Redeemer,  '^It  is  finished^''''  all 
priestly  intervention  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
was  at  an  end.  As  well  carry  torches  in  the 
sunlight  as  talk  of  a  sacriiice  now  !  As  well 
expect  the  stars  to  shine  after  the  sun  has 
reached  its  zenith  as  to  suppose  a  human  priest- 
hood necessary  for  the  Church  when  she  has  a 
Priest  ever  living  and  divine,  at  the  right  hand 
of  God  I  The  substance  is  ours  :  what  need 
any  longer  of  the  shadows  ? 

Examined  then  in  the  light  which  streams 
from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  upon  the 
whole  subject  of  priestly  functions  under  the 
Old  Testament  and  the  New,  this  question 
ceases  to  be  a  question,  because  it  is  con- 
clusively answered  in  tlie  negative. 

But  it  is  necessary  to  disjjose  of  an  objection 
drawn  from  this  very  epistle,  ch.  xiii.  10, 
where  the  apostle  says,  "  We  have  an  altar." 
The  objection  is,  that  an  altar  implies  a  priest 
and  a  sacriiice,  so  that  if  under  the  Christian 
dispensation  we  have  "  altars,"  we  must  also 
by  necessity  have  ' '  priests. ' ' 

"We  answer,  first :  If  this  were  the  meaning 
of  this  verse  it  would  be  plainly  in  conflict  with 
the  whole  tenor  of  the  rest  of  the  epistle. 
Such   an    interpretation    therefore    must    be 


INTBOD  UCTOR  T  E88A  T.  21 

looked  upon  with  great  suspicion,  and  before 
being  accepted  must  be  required  to  vindicate 
itself  as  tlie  only  possible  interpretation  of  the 
passage.  But,  secondly,  the  interpretation 
alluded  to  is  not  oven  the  natural  and  obvious 
one,  much  less  the  only  one.  The  apostle  is 
contrasting  those  who  still  adhered  to  Judaism 
with  those  who  accepted  Christianity.  In 
this  connection  he  says,  "  We  (Christians) 
have  an  altar  whereof  they  have  no  right  to 
eat  whicli  serve  the  tal)ernacle."  After  the 
sacrifice  under  the  law  there  was  a  feast  ;  and 
the  priests  and  Levites  wlio  "  served  the  tab- 
ernacle" had  an  official  right  to  eat  of  the 
victims  slain  on  tlie  altar.  2sow  the  apostle 
insists  that  of  the  Christian's  altar  these  ser- 
vants of  the  tal)ernacle  liad  no  right  to  eat. 
Wliat  is  that  altar?  '^  Tlie  Lord's  Table," 
say  tlie  advocates  of  the  sacei'dotal  view  of 
tlie  ministry.  jS'ot  so,  we  reply.  The 
Lord's  talde  is  not  the  altar  upon  which  the 
sacrifice  is  made  whereof  the  Christian  ''  eats 
and  lives  forever,"  unless  the  doctrine  of  the 
mass  be  no  longer  "  a  blaspliemous  fable  and 
a  dangerous  deceit."  Tiik  Ciioss  on  which 
the  body  of  Jesns  Christ  was  olfered,  a  sacri- 
fice full,   perfect,   and  sufficient,   and    ''  once 


22  INTBODUCTOBY  ESSAY 

for  all,"  that  is  the  altar,  and  the  only  altar 
which  Christianity  either  knows  or  needs. 

Of  the  victim  slain  on  that  altar  thej  who 
serve  the  tabernacle  have  no  right  to  eat  ; 
but  every  Christian  eats  thereof.  By  faith 
he  eats  the  flesh  and  drinks  the  blood  of  the 
Lamb  that  was  slain  (John  vi.  54).* 

This  interpretation  is  in  perfect  harmony 
with  the  rest  of  the  epistle,  whereas  the  other 
is  totally  at  variance  with  it.  Indeed,  it  pre- 
sents another  beautifnl  instance  of  the  cor- 
respondence between  the  Levitical  system  of 
types,  and  Christianity  as  the  great  Antity})e. 
"  We  have  ax  altak,"  says  the  apostle.  Tsot 
Tnaiiy  altars — not  an  altar  in  every  church- 
but  ONE  altar  ;  even  as  the  Jcm's  had  not  an 
altar  in  every  synagogue,  but  one  oxly,  the 
great  altar  of  Sacrifice  which  stood  at  the  door 
of  the  sanctuary- 
There  are,  however,  certain  Old  Testament 
passages  (Ezek.  xli.  22  and  Mai.  i.  7)  in  which 
"the  altar  of  the  Lord"  and  ''the  table 
of  the  Lord "  are  used  as  convertil)le  ex- 
pressions ;  and  it*  is   lience  argued   tliat  they 

*  This  interpretation  is  approved  l)y  D'Oyly  and  Mant, 
in  which  commentary  a  ])assage  from  Bishop  Hull  is 
quoted  to  the  same  effect  as  the  above.  It  was  accepted 
even  by  Thomas  Aquinas,  as  now  by  Alford  and  De- 
li tzsch. 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  23 

are  equally  convertible  in  the  New  Testament. 
But  surely  there  is  a  gulf  between  the  prem- 
ises and  the  conclusion  of  this  argument, 
which  logic  cannot  bridge  over.  What  are 
the  facts  of  the  case  ?  In  the  Old  Testament 
the  terms  Altar  of  the  Lord  and  Table  of  the 
Lord  are  often  used  indiscriminately  as  equiv- 
alent and  convertible  expressions.  In  the 
New  Testament,  thougli  both  terms  occur, 
they  are  never  used  indiscriminately,  never 
employed  to  describe  the  same  thing  ;  the 
one  being  applied  exclusively  in  connection 
Anth  Judaism  (with  the  single  exception  of 
Ileb.  xiii.  10,  which  is  irrelevant),  the  other 
exclusively  in  connection  witli  the  Christian 
ordinance  of  the  Lord's  Supjjer.  What  is 
the  natural,  if  not  the  necessary,  inference 
from  this  ?  Surely  the  reverse  of  that  which 
has  been  mentioned  above. 

Tliis  marked  difference  of  language  between 
tlie  two  Testaments  iiiij)lies  a  difference  of 
doctrliw  :  implies  that  while  tlie  Lord's  Altar 
was  the  Lord's  Table  muler  the  Levitical  sys- 
tem, under  the  Christian  system  it  is  not  so. 
And  thus  these  passages  from  the  i)ropliets 
confirm  instead  of  weakening  our  argument. 
The  reason  for  the  diseriminati(»n  is  ol)vious. 
The  Jewish  altar,  after  a   sacrifice  was  made, 


24  INTRODUGTOBT  ESSAY. 

was  a  table,  because  there  was  a  feast  upon  a 
sacrifice.  The  victim,  first  offered,  was  then 
eaten.  But  under  the  Gospel  it  was  not  so. 
Plere  there  was  but  07ie  victim,  once  offered, 
and  hence  but  one  altar  and  one  sacrifice. 
Although,  therefore,  the  feast  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  is  to  be  continually  repeated  for  the 
refreshment  of  His  people  to  the  end  of  the 
world,  the  sacrifice  is  not  repeated,  and  there- 
fore the  Lord's  table  is  not  the  Lord's  altar. 

It  appears  therefore  tliat  the  testimony  of 
the  Xew  Testament  upon  this  question  is 
clear  and  consistent,  and  that  it  gives  an  em- 
phatic rebuke  to  the  notion  that  the  Chris- 
tian minister  stands  as  a  mediator  between  the 
people  and  God,  that  his  ofiice  is  vicarial,  or 
that  he  is  emi^owered  to  dispense  the  benefits 
of  the  atoning  sacrifice  in  any  exclusive  sense. 

His  office  is  indeed  designated  '*  The  min- 
istry of  reconciliation  ;"  but  it  is  as  an  ambas- 
sador of  Christ,  not  as  a  mediating  priest,  that 
he  exercises  tliis  function.  It  is  true,  also, 
that  he  is  commissioned  to  ''  declare  and  pro- 
nounce to  His  2:)eople,  being  penitent,  the  ab- 
solution and  remission  of  their  sins  ;"  but 
this  is  not  ^jiid'tridL  but  a  purely  ministerial 
function,   and   it   is   tJie  j^rroiavhjation    of  the 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  25 

general  terms  of  ahsolution,  and  not  the  con- 
veyance of  absolution  in  any  individual  case. 

Any  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  therefore, 
which  contradicts  this  fundamental  view  of  the 
nature  of  the  Christian  ministry  must  be  fun- 
damentally at  fault.  And  any  interpretation 
of  special  passages  of  Xew  Testament  Scrip- 
ture which  is  in  conflict  with  its  general  tenor, 
as  above  exhibited,  falls  at  once  under  just  sus- 
picion of  being  a  perversion  of  their  real  sig- 
nification.* 

A  brief  consideration  of  some  of  these  pass- 
ages will  appropriately  close  this  essay, 

Mr.  Sadler  occupies  the  larger  part  of  his  chap- 
ter on  "  The  Christian  Priesthood' 'f  in  proving 
the  Thesis  that  a  system  of  Ministerial  Agency 
in  the  Christian  Church  is  only  what  might 

*  The  Latin  title  of  the  Thirty-second  Article,  'Be 
Cmijugio  Sucerdutum,"  is  alle.tred  as  a  ground  for  the 
opinion  that  the  CUiurch  of  England  adhered  to  the 
sacerdotal  view  of  the  niinistrj-.  But  this  is  disproved 
by  the  fact  that  the  word  "  Sacerdotum"  here  is  in- 
tended to  include  Deacons  as  Aveli  as  Bishops  and  Priests 
— "Episcoi)is,  Presbyteris,  et  Ducouis."  As  to  tiie  ex- 
pressions in  the  Institution  Office  in  the  American  Prayer- 
Book,  we  are  compelled  either  frankly  to  admit  that  they 
arc  not  in  harmony  with  the  rest  of  the  Prayer-Book,  or 
to  hold  that  the  terms  are  used  "abusive  et  improprie," 
as  Ridley  said  of  like  expressions  in  the  Early  Fathers. 

■f  "  Church  Doctrine  Bible  Truth." 


26  •;  INTRODTICTORT  ES8AT. 

have  been  expected  from  the  analogy  of  the 
patriarchal  and  Mosaic  Dispensations — a  prop- 
osition which  is  obvious  and  not  questioned  by 
any  school  among  us.  The  matter  which  is 
really  at  issue  concerns  the  nature  of  this 
agency,  whether  it  be,  properly  speaking,  sac- 
erdotal or  no,  whether  it  be  a  necessary  chan- 
nel of  grace,  and  whether  it  be  ajjpointed  to 
make  atonement  for  the  people,  or  only  to 
point  to  the  Atonement  ;  to  convey  absolution 
to  the  penitent,  or  only  to  declare  the  terms 
of  absolution.  We  may  not  hesitate  to  admit 
that  our  Lord  constituted  His  Apostles  "  His 
ministers,  His  fellow-workers,  and  His  repre- 
sentatives" (Sadler,  p.  220)  ;  but  when  it  is 
asserted  that  he  "  employed  them  to  do  the 
things  which  He  Himself  did"  (id.),  we  must 
call  attention  to  this  very  important  exception — 
Me  never  made  them  the  channels  of  ahsolution 
to  the  penitent :  He  fed  the  multitudes  by 
their  hands,  but  He  reserved  to  Himself  the 
dispensing  of  absolution — from  his  0"v\ai  lips, 
not  from  those  of  the  Apostles,  fell  the  words, 
which  gave  peace  to  the  erring  woman,  '^  Thy 
sins  be  forgiven  thee."  We  are  referred, 
however,  to  tlie  j9(9i/j<?r  of  the  keys  (Matt.  xvi. 
19),  and  to  that  oflnnding  and  loosing  (Kiiii. 
xviii.  18),  as  if  these  established  the  sacerdotal 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  27 

principle.  But  as  to  tlie  former  of  these  pass- 
ages, whetlier,  with  Professor  Plumptre,  we 
interpret  it  by  the  Jewish  custom  of  dehvering 
a  key  to  the  scribe  when  he  was  admitted  to 
his  office,  because  he  was  hencefortli  to  open 
the  treasures  of  Divine  Wisdom  to  the  people, 
or  whether,  with  Canon  Perowne,  we  explain 
it  l)y  the  parallel  passages  of  Isa.  xxii.  22  and 
Rev.  i.  18,  where  the  key  is  ev^idently  the 
symbol  of  rule  and  government — the  conclu- 
sion is  the  same  ;  it  has  no  reference  to  any 
absolving  power,  but  to  that  of  teach ing  or 
ruling.  And  as  to  tlie  second  passage,  it  is  ob- 
viously to  l)e  explained  l)y  the  m'us  Joquendi 
of  Jewish  anth(jrs,  witli  whom  it  is  a  very  fre- 
quent expression  in  the  sense  of  foritidding 
and  pcrniitting  ;  tliat  whicli  was  hound  was 
forhidden  •  tliat  which  Avas  loosed  was  al- 
lowed. /  and  tlius  understood,  the  passage  has 
no  reference  to  any  sacerdotal  act  of  absolution. 
The  supposed  al)8olution  of  sin  ///  and  />//  bap- 
tism may  be  disnn'ssed  fi-om  the  discussion, 
inasmuch  wa^  the  advocates  of  priestly  al)S0- 
lution  are  compelled  to  admit  that,  if  any  such 
power  existed,  it  would  in  tliat  case  be  exercised 
by  deacons,  and  even  by  hn/iiu-iK  in  cases  of 
emergcTU'v -—which  is  inconsistent  with  the 
natural  sense  of  their  theoi-y.      The  A])ostolic 


28   •  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

Commission  (John  xx.  21-23)  remains  the  only 
passage  which  gives  any  show  of  sanction  to 
sacerdotahsm.  Now,  when  we  come  to  ex- 
amine this  cntically,  we  discover,  in  the  first 
place,  that  it  is  most  proljable  that  the  words 
of  our  Lord  were  not  addressed  to  the  eleven 
alone,  bnt  to  the  whole  Clmrcli  (cf.  Lnke 
xxiv,  38,  which  apparently  describes  the  same 
scene  as  that  recorded  in  John  xx.  21-23j,  and 
then  Mr.  Sadler's  principles  bring  ns  to  the 
conclusion  that  this  gift  of  absolving  power 
was  bestowed  upon  others  hesides  the  Apostles 
—which  is  fatal  to  his  theory.  Without  press- 
ing this  view  of  tlie  case,  let  it  be  ol)served  that 
the  language  of  our  Lord,  ' '  As  my  Fatlier  hath 
sent  me,  even  so  send  1  you,"  di'aws  our 
minds  to  the  idea  of  amhassage,  not  oi lyi'ltstly 
mdhority  /  tlie  Apostles  were  sent  by  Christ, 
to  be  witnesses  and  ambassadors,  etc.,  of  His 
Gospel.  And,  further,  the  remitting  and  re- 
taining of  sins  can  only  be  consistently  under- 
stood as  having  reference  to  tiie  entire  mission 
of  the  Chnrcli  in  the  worhl,  and  to  cH  tlie  offices 
of  tlie  Christian  ministry.  This  is  the  view 
of  so  profound  a  scholar  and  so  great  a  master 
of  theology  as  Bishop  Thirlwall,  who  liolds 
that  in  preaching  and  teaching  and  ruling  this 
power  is  exercised  as  well  as  in  declaring  and 


INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY.  29 

pronouncing  the  terms  of  absolution,  and  wlio 
does  not  hesitate  to  say  that  "  evet^y  Christian 
has  a  warrant  to  say  to  his  brother,  '  Repent 
and  believe,  and  thy  sins  shall  be  forgiven  thee  ;' 
but  before  he  can  say  with  certainty  '  Thy 
sins  are  forgiven  thee, '  he  must  either  have  re- 
ceived some  supernatural  assurance  of  the  fact, 
or  he  must  qualify  the  declaration  with  the 
condition,  '  If  thou  repentest  and  believest, '  "  * 
Such  a  view  of  this  passage  is  the  only  one 
which  is  consistent  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
rest  of  the  New  Testament.  It  is  also  tlie  only 
one  which  comports  witli  the  practice  of  the 
Apostles,  for  we  have  no  record  in  the  New 
Testament  of  tlieir  exercising  any  such  power 
as  is  chiimed  to  be  conferred  by  this  commission. 
Peter  and  JoJin  healed  the  sick  and  instructed 
the  multitudes  after  the  example  of  the  Master, 
but  they  did  not  venture  to  say  to  any,  as 
Jesus  so  often  did,  "  Thy  sins  be  forgiven 
thee.''  On  the  contrary,  they  directed  them  to 
the  Lord  for  forgiveness  ;  as  when  Peter  re- 
buked Simon  Magus,  he  did  not  tell  him  to 
come  to  liim  as  a  mediator  l)y  whom  lie  mia'ht 
be  reconciled,  hut  instructed  him  to  go  himself 
to  his  offended  (n)d  for  pardon. 

*  Sec  tlu'  extract   in  tlie   following  paijes  from  liis  ser- 
mon on  this  text. 


30  INTRODUCTORY  ESSAY. 

"  These  passages,  then,  when  fairly  considered, 
lend  no  support  to  that  view  of  the  ministry 
which  it  is  the  object  of  this  essay  to  oppose, 
and  we  may,  therefore,  undonbtingly  conclude 
that,  judged  at  the  bar  of  the  New  Testament, 
sacerdotalism  must  be  condemned,  since  neither 
"  the  name'''  nor  "  the  thing''''  can  be  found 
within  its  pages  as  forming  any  part  of  the 
ministry  of  reconciliation  established  by  the 
Lord  and  exercised  by  His  apostles. 


TESTIMONY  OF  BISHOP  AVM.  WHITE 

U  TWO  LETTERS  TO  liEV.  JOHN  HOBART,  D.D. 

(Aftenvnrd  Bii^hoi)  of  New  York). 

CALLED  FORTH  BY^THE  PERUSAL  OP 

DR  HICKES  ON  THE  CHRISTIAN  PRIESTHOOD  ASSERTED" 


DR.  JOHNSON  ON  THE  UNBLOODY  SACRIFICE." 


TESTIMONY  OF  BISHOP  WM.  WHITE. 


LETTEli   T. 


Philadei-puia,  October  30,  1806. 

Dkak  Sir  :  1  return  your  two  volumes  of 
Dr.  riickes,  with  thanks  for  the  loan  of  them. 
Indeed,  I  am  ashamed  that  I  had  been  so  long 
without  liaving  read  a  w^ork  of  so  much  celeb- 
rity. The  ])erusal  has  confirmed  my  opinion 
of  the  author,  that  he  was  a  learned,  an  inge- 
nious, a  sincere,  but,  in  some  ])oints,  a  mistaken 
man  ;  and  therefore  I  cannot  send  you  l)ack  the 
work  without  intimating  to  you  the  genei'al 
tenor  of  my  objections  to  some  leading  nuitters, 
in  regard  to  which  I  hope  that  you  will  not  only 
consider  them  fully  before  you  finally  adopt 
them,  but  be  aware  of  the  conse({uences  to 
which  they  lead. 

The  ])art  of  the  work  which  f  have  pai-tic- 
ularly  in  view  is  that  entitled  "•  The  (Mii-istian 
Priesthood  Asserted,"  the  leading  sentiment 
of   which  is.  that  a  bishd])  itiid  a  ])resbyter  ani 

;} 


34  NATURE  OF 

"  priests"  in  the  Levitical  sense  of  the  words  ; 
that  is,  each  of  them  is  "  7^/)? u; "  or  "  Sac- 
erdos. ' '  For  as  to  the  word  ' '  priest,  "it  is 
correct  on  the  ground  of  either  system,  being 
the  word  "  TIpEG^vrepoi'''  Englished,  and  yet 
used  as  the  translation  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 
words  above  mentioned. 

Can  you  be  seriously  satisfied  with  Dr. 
Hickes'  conjectural  reason  for  the  not  calling 
the  Christian  clergy  'hpsii^  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment ?  Had  the  cause  of  the  reserve  been 
such  as  Dr.  Hickes  imagines — respect  to  the 
Jewish  prejudices  so  long  as  the  temple  wor- 
ship w^as  in  being — surely  the  cause  had  ceased 
when  St.  John  wrote  his  Gospel,  which  was 
long  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  and 
there  are  many  places  in  which  the  change  of 
lang-uae^e  might  have  been  seasonablv  insinuat- 
ed.  Supposing  a  reason  could  be  assigned, 
though  I  cannot  imagine  any,  to  this  omission 
of  the  Evangelist,  was  it  not  high  time  when 
Barnabas,  when  Hermas,  when  Clement, 
when  Ignatius,  and  when  Justin  wrote,  that 
the  new  name  should  appear  ?  In  the  ^Tit- 
ings  of  all  these  authors  there  is  reference 
more  or  less  to  the  person  vested  with  the 
ministerial  character,  but  never  are  they  desig- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  35 

nated  as  ^^'IspsU ;"  unless,  indeed,  like  Daille, 
we  slionld  so  apply  the  word  as  it  stands  in  a 
particular  passage  of  St.  Ignatius,  and  which 
Daille  accordingly  alleged  as  an  argument 
against  the  genuineness  of  his  epistle.  But 
what  says  his  learned  vindicator,  Bishop 
Pearson  ?  He  impliedly  admits  the  validity 
of  the  objection,  on  the  supposition  that  the 
sense  given  by  the  objector  to  the  passage 
were  the  true  one.  But  this  he  positively,  and 
with  great  reason,  denies,  as  Dr.  Hammond, 
in  answer  to  another  writer,  had  done  before 
him. 

I  coniidently  exj)ress  my  opinion,  that  for 
one  hundred  years  after  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple,  the  date  to  which  the  reason  of  the 
reserve  is  limited,  there  is  no  evidence  of  a 
Christian  minister's  being  called  "  Ispetk  "  or 
"  Sacerdos. "  Although  these  words  were  in- 
troduced not  long  afterwards,  yet  they  were 
used  sparingly  for  a  while  ;  and  when  they 
became  a  j)art  of  the  established  phraseology 
of  the  Church,  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  it 
was  accompanied  by  a  change  of  sentiment, 
comj)rehen<ling  the  seeds  of  the  errors,  which 
became  so  deplorably  prevalent  in  the  succeed- 
ing ages.  So  far  was  the  change  of  language 
from  being  complete,  when   Tertullian  wrote. 


36  NAIURE  OF 

that,  having  used  the  words  "  sumimis  sacer- 
dos,"  he  explams  himself  by  adding,  "  qui  est 
episcopns,"  which  would  have  been  unneces- 
sary some  time  afterwards. 

What  I  have  said  concerning  "  priest,"  may 
be  applied,  in  resjject  to  the  same  tract  of 
time,  to  "  sacrifice  ;"  distinguishing  it,  how- 
ever, from  oblation,  which  Dr.  Hickes  does 
not,  although  the  doing  so  is  frequent  among 
writers,  and  the  distinction  is  obvious  in  Le- 
viticus. If  there  be  any  exception  to  my 
propositions,  it  is  in  what  Dr.  Hickes  has  cited 
from  Justin  Martyr,  who  wrote  a  very  few 
years  within  the  period  mentioned.  Concern- 
ing this  venerable  author  I  have  to  remark, 
that  although  his  language,  strictly  taken,  ap- 
plies to  material  sacrifice,  yet  he  elsewhere 
speaks  as  if  there  could  be  no  Christian  sacri- 
fice but  that  of  the  heart.  Plence  some  have 
not  scrupled  to  accuse  him  of  inconsistency. 
But  this  I  avoid,  if  there  be  any  expedient  to 
reconcile  him  to  himself  ;  and  tliis  seems  to 
me  to  have  been  well  done,  with  the  exclnsicm 
of  material  sacrifice,  by  Dr.  Waterland,  to 
whom  I  refer  you  on  the  point.  Certain  it  is, 
that  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Irengeus,  and  Ter- 
tullian,  who  wrote  not  many  years  after  Jus- 
tin,   speak  very  strongly  of  there   being  no 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  37 

other  sacrifices  than  holy  dispositions  of  the 
mind.  And  that  these  should  be  designated 
by  Justin,  under  the  name  of  a  material  offer- 
ing accompanying  them,  may  be  the  easier 
conceived,  as  the  like  is  done  in  Scripture,  for 
instance,  where  the  alms  of  Cornelius  are  said 
to  have  come  up  for  a  memorial,  meaning  not 
surely  the  alms  of  themselves,  but  the  mental 
benevolence  from  which  they  derived  their 
value. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  remark  concerning 
"  priest"  and  "  sacrifice"  may  be  extended  to 
the  word  ' '  altar. ' '  There  are,  indeed,  some 
passages  in  St.  Ignatius  which  speak  of 
"altar,"  in  a  form  that  looks  more  like  his 
having  a  material  altar  in  view,  than  any  pas- 
sage that  appears  in  any  other  quarter.  They 
may  bear  this  sense,  but  they  may  also  l)ear 
the  metaphorical,  which  I  ])reter,  on  the  con- 
siderations that  nothing  could  have  been  more 
natural  than  for  Christians  to  take  their  meta- 
phor from  the  Old  Testament  economy  ;  that, 
if  the  contrary  interpretation  1)0  correct,  Igna- 
tius is  the  only  instance  within  the  time  of 
which  we  are  speaking  of  such  a  use  of  the 
word;  and  that  "'priest"  (fepev;),  being 
correlative  to  *'  altar,"  I  cannot  otherwise 
account  for  his  never  applying  of  tlie  former 


38  NATURE  OF 

word  to  the  Christian  ministers,  although  he 
has  occasion  to  speak  of  them  so  often,  I  feel 
more  satisfaction  in  the  opinion  now  expressed, 
than  in  joining  with  Mosheim,  who  says  that 
"  the  question  concerning  the  authenticity  of 
Ignatius'  epistles  is  embarrassed  with  many 
difficulties  ;"  or  with  our  judicious  Jortin, 
who  ' '  hesitates  to  affirm  that  they  have  un- 
dergone no  alterations  at  all." 

On  the  subject  generally,  there  has  been  a 
passage  quoted  from  St.  Clement,  although  I 
forget  whether  Dr.  Hickes  notices  it.  To  me 
the  passage,  which  is  in  ch.  40,  41,  speaks 
merely  the  language  of  comparison,  applied  to 
the  single  point  of  every  man's  discliarging 
his  official  duty  in  the  proper  time  and  place. 
On  reading  formerly  the  use  made  of  it  by  Mr. 
Johnson,  in  his  "  Unbloody  Sacrifice,"  1  had 
tlie  curiosity  to  look  into  Bona,  and  found  the 
zeal  of  the  Romish  cardinal  less  in  this  respect 
than  tliat  of  the  Protestant  presbyter  ;  the 
former  not  citing  Clement  to  his  purpose, 
wliich  might  liave  been  expected,  had  tlie  pas- 
sage been  applicable,  in  his  opinion. 

Let  me  not  be  misunderstood,  in  regard  to 
the  words  spoken  of,  as  if  I  objected  altogether 
to  the  use  of  them  as  applied  to  the  Christian 
Church.     There  are  so  manv  circumstances  in 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  39 

her  economy  analogous  to  that  of  the  law,  that 
such  a  use  seems  natural  and  unexception- 
able ;  and  therefore  I  join  with  Mr.  Hooker 
in  saying  :  "  The  names  themselves  may  be 
retained  without  sin,  in  respect  to  that  pro- 
portion which  things  established  by  our  Sav- 
iour have  unto  them  which  are  abrogated  ; 
and  so,  throughout  all  the  writings  of  the  an- 
cient fathers,  we  see  that  the  words  which 
were  do  continue  ;  the  only  difference  is  that, 
whereas  before  they  had  a  literal,  they  now 
have  a  metaphorical  use,  and  are  so  many  notes 
of  remembrance  unto  us,  that  what  they  did 
signify  in  the  letter  is  accomplished  in  the 
truth."  Yes,  let  us  in  moderation  use  the 
words,  but  let  them  be  understootl  in  meta- 
phor, meaning  tliis  as  opposed  to  the  letter 
and  not  to  the  reality,  which  is  not  injured  by 
the  distinction.  F)Ut  when  the  words  are 
taken  literally,  we  may  learn  from  the  case  of 
Dr.  Tlickes  ti)  what  mistakes  they  lead,  as  in 
his  making  of  Christian  ministers,  intercessors, 
mediators,  aTid  expiators. 

In  what  sense  are  ministers  intercessors  for 
their  flocks,  in  which  tliese  may  not  be  inter- 
cessors for  them  also  ?  St.  Paul  in  several 
places  asks  those  whom  he  addresses  to  ])ray 
for  him,   and   in   one  ])l;i('('  ho  hopes,   as  the 


40  NATURE  OF 

effect  of  their  prayers,  tliat  he  may  l)e  restored 
to  them  the  sooner.  There  is  no  notice  in  the 
New  Testament  of  more  tlian  "  one  Mediator 
between  God  and  men."  The  Jewish  priest- 
hood was  different  in  this  respect  from  the 
Christian  ministry.  Under  the  law,  the  sacri- 
fice or  tlie  oblation  was  brought  by  the  wor- 
shipper to  the  priest,  and  though  there  was, 
doubtless,  exacted  sincerity  in  the  former, 
yet  the  act  of  sacrilicing  was  performed  ex- 
clusively by  the  latter.  Analogous  to  this  is 
the  mass  of  the  Romish  Church,  in  which  the 
sacrifice  is  performed  entirely  by  the  priest,  it 
not  being  held  necessary  that  the  people  should 
understand  a  syllable  of  what  is  said.  But 
what  is  there  like  this  in  the  worship  of  our 
Church  ?  Or  what  are  the  remains  which  we 
p*ossess  of  the  early  Church  i  Certainly  noth- 
ing ;  for  in  both  the  language  of  the  service 
shows  that  the  minister  is  the  mouth  of  tlie 
congregation,  who  are  sup])0sed  not  only  to 
say  "  amen"  at  the  conclusion,  l)ut  to  accom- 
pany him  through  the  whole.  And  as  to 
ministerial  expiation,  it  seems  to  me  not  only 
an  utterly  inadmissil)le  idea,  but  particularly 
alien  from  the  service  of  the  eucharist,  to 
which  it  is  especially  aj)plied  hy  Dr.  Ilickes, 
and  those  who  think  witli  him  ;  for  it  seems 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  41 

agreed  on  all  hands,  that  this  holy  ordinance 
answei*s  not  to  sacrifice  of  expiation,  but  to 
that  of  the  peace-offerings,  which  are  never 
said  to  make  atonement,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
suppose  the  woi-shipper  in  a  state  of  reconcilia- 
tion. I  forbear  to  dilate  on  the  consequences 
of  our  leading  of  the  people  to  1)elieve  that  at 
every  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  we  are 
making  atonement  for  sin.  Xo  ;  let  it  be  a 
commemoration  of  an  atonement  made  once 
for  all  ;  an  interest  in  which  is  to  l)e  judged 
of  by  every  man,  according  to  his  conscious- 
ness of  wliat  he  is  and  does. 

I  will  give  you,  as  ])riefiy  as  I  can,  my  sense 
of  the  texts  wliich  Dr.  IUckes  lias  enlisted  in 
his  service. 

His  first  is  Matthew  v.  2:^.,  24  :  "  Therefore 
if  thou  bring  thy  gift  to  the  altar,  and  there 
remend)erest  that  thy  brothei-  hath  aught 
against  thee  ;  leave  there  thy  gift  before  the 
altar,  and  go  thy  way  ;  first  be  re(;on('iled  to 
thy  brother,  and  then  come  and  ofier  thy  gift. '' 
Now,  if  we  were  to  suppose  our  Saviour  speak- 
ing in  language  accommodated  not  to  an  exist- 
ing, but  to  a  future  economy,  which,  however, 
seems  very  unreasonable,  yet  it  would  Ite  evi- 
dent that  the  j)assage  is  then  inconsistent  with 
Dr.   ilickes'  su])|)ostMl    ivservi- of  i>ni'  Saviour 


42  NATURE  OF 

on  this  subject.  For  although  Dr.  Hickes 
truly  remarks,  tliat  tlie  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
was  to  the  Lord's  disciples,  yet,  as  annotators 
notice,  the  term  must  be  understood  with  a 
latitude,  since  it  is  said,  on  the  finishing  of 
the  discourse,  "  the  multitude  were  astonished 
at  His  doctrine,"  By  the  disciples  were  ac- 
cordingly meant  those  generally  who  had  re- 
ceived His  instnictions.  Where,  then,  would 
have  been  the  wisdom  of  the  supposed  secrecy 
concerning  a  new  altar  and  a  new  priesthood 
to  be  in  due  time  set  up  ? 

The  same  remark  applies  to  another  of 
Dr.  Hickes'  texts — that  of  Hebrews  xiii.  10  : 
"  We  have  an  altar,  whereof  they  have  no  right 
to  eat  which  serve  the  tabernacle."'  Here,  it 
seems,  the  secret  was  divulged  to  the  whole 
body  of  Hebrew  Christians,  in  the  very  teeth 
of  all  their  prejudices.  But  no  ;  that  the 
sacrifice  of  the  altar  spoken  of  could  not  have 
been  the  eucharist,  is  evident  in  the  circum- 
stance that  this  has  nothing  answering,  even  in 
a  spiritual  sense,  to  those  sacrifices  in  which 
the  bodies  of  the  victims  "  were  burnt  without 
the  camp."  But  I  refer  you  to  Dr.  Ham- 
mond for  an  explanation  of  that  text. 

In  Komans  xv.  15,  16  ["'  ^Nevertheless, 
brethren,  I  have  written  the  more  boldly  unto 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  43 

you  in  8ome  sort,  as  putting  you  in  mind,  be- 
cause of  tlie  grace  that  is  given  to  me  of 
God,  that  I  should  be  the  minister  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Gentiles,  ministering  the  Gospel 
of  God,  that  the  offering  up  of  the  Gentiles 
might  be  acceptable,  being  sanctified  by  the 
Holy  Ghost"],  there  is  a  noble  figure,  the 
beauty  of  which  is  very  much  lessened  if  we 
depart  from  the  usual  translation  and  interpre- 
tation, of  the  offering  being  of  the  persons  of 
the  Gentiles,  and  if  we  apply  it  to  their  eu- 
charist  or  to  their  devotions  generally. 

In  1  Corinthians  ix.  18  ["  Do  ye  not  know 
that  they  which  minister  about  holy  things 
live  of  the  things  of  the  temj)le  ?  and  they 
which  wait  at  the  altar  are  partakers  with  the 
altar  ?"]  there  is  a  parallel  drawn  between 
Jewish  priests  and  Cliristian  ministers,  in 
the  single  point  of  their  being  alike  entitled 
to  a  maintenance.  What  is  more  common 
than  in  the  making  of  a  comparison,  where 
there  is  nothing  common  to  the  subjects,  ex- 
cept the  circumstance  for  which  the  compari- 
son is  made  '. 

In  1  (Corinthians  x.  2(»,  21  (*'  But  I  say, 
that  the  things  which  the  (rcntiles  sacrifice 
they  sacrifice  to  devils,  and  not  to  (^od  :  and  I 
would  n(»t  that  ye  should  have  fellowship  with 


44  NATURE  OF 

devils.  Ye  cannot  drink  the  cup  of  the  Lord, 
and  the  cup  of  devils  :  ye  cannot  be  partakers 
of  the  Lord's  table,  and  of  the  table  of  devils"], 
it  is  sufficient  to  the  apostle's  reasoning  if  the 
bread  and  wine  of  the  eucharist  are  an  ap- 
pointed memorial  of  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ.  For  then  the  partaking  of  tliem  is 
inconsistent  with  the  partaking  of  heathen  sac- 
rifice. 

Dr.  Hickes'  remarks  on  *'  ttoujv'"  are  at 
best  too  slight  a  ground  on  which  to  erect  a 
theory.  Besides,  liis  explanation  of  it,  as  ap- 
plied to  the  eucharist,  seems  fully  satisfied  by 
the  idea  of  an  oblation  in  that  ordinance. 

He  understands  an  expression  in  1  Peter 
ii.  9  ["  But  ye  are  a  chosen  generation,  a 
royal  priesthood,  a  holy  nation,  a  peculiar 
people  ;  that  ye  should  shew  forth  the  praises 
of  Ilim  who  hath  called  you  out  of  darkness  into 
His  marvellous  Hght"],  as  synonymous  with 
a  kingdom  of  j^riests,  or  a  priestly  government. 
But  the  passage  receives  a  different  interpre- 
tation from  Bevelation  i.  6  ['"  And  liatli 
made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God  and  His 
Father  ;  to  Him  be  glory  and  dominion  for- 
ever and  ever.  Amen"'],  wliich  makes  priests 
in  tlie  accommodated  sense  intended  of  all  the 
people   of  the  seven  churches.      It  seems  to 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  45 

me  tliat  there  is  no  explaining  of  tliose  passages 
bnt  in  allusion  to  the  eminent  holiness  which 
Christianity  exacts,  and  the  dignity  of  charac- 
ter which  it  bestows.  And  tliese  are  coinci- 
dent witli  the  apostle's  train  of  sentiment  in 
the  passage  iirst  mentioned. 

We  have  heard  much  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  as  desciibing  a  pretiguration  of  the 
Christian  priesthood  in  that  of  the  law.  But 
the  analogy  there  ti-aced  is  declared  to  be  ac- 
complished in  the  priesthood  of  Christ  ;  that 
is,  in  His  sacrifice  of  the  cross,  and  His  presen- 
tation of  it  in  heaven.  The  part  of  the  epistle 
alluded  to  has  no  reference  to  the  Christian 
ministry,  unless  on  the  principle  of  a  continued 
pnestly  olfering  of  the  true  atonement,  as  is 
pretended  in  the  niass.  P)nt  this  must  be 
proved  through  some  other  medium,  for  there 
is  nothing  of  it  in  the  epistle. 

Dr.  Hickes  cites  Uevelatiou  v.  8  [''  And 
when  he  had  taken  the  book,  the  four  beasts 
and  four  and  twenty  elders  fell  down  before 
the  Lamb,  liaving  every  one  of  them  liar])s, 
and  golden  vials  full  of  odors,  which  are  the 
prayers  of  saiiits"  |,  and  viii.  '^  ["And  an- 
other angel  came  and  stood  at  the  altar, 
having  a  golden  censer  ;  and  there  was  given 
unto  him  much  incense,  that  he  should  otfei"  it 


46  ■  NATURE  OF 

with  the  prayere  of  all  saints  upon  the  golden 
altar  which  was  before  the  throne"].  But  was 
it  unobserved  by  him  tliat  all  mattere  relating 
to  the  Christian  Church  in  that  book  are  fig- 
uratively represented  under  terms  of  the 
Jewish  economy  ?  The  scene  is  laid  in  the 
Temple  ;  the  names  of  the  Israelitish  tribes 
are  ascribed  to  Christian  people  ;  the  martyred 
saints  repose  under  the  altar  ;  and,  in  short,  all 
the  circumstances  are  accommodated  to  the 
figure. 

In  regard  to  Dr.  Hickes'  texts  generally,  it 
may  be  remarked  that  his  interpretation  de- 
stroys the  ground  of  the  reserve  supposed  by 
him.  If  liis  interpretation  be  correct,  a  new 
sacrifice,  a  new  priesthood,  and  a  new  altar 
were  explicitly  declared,  and  there  was  no 
reason  against  making  the  names  correspond 
with  the  subjects.  But  if  that  interpretation 
be  wrong,  I  appeal  to  you  whether,  at  least 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  there 
might  not  be  expected  from  an  apostle  or  some 
apostolic  man — I  need  not  say  an  explicit  dec- 
laration, but  at  least  an  intimation  of  the  in- 
tended change,  and  that  it  should  not  have 
been  left  to  be  discovered  by  human  ingenuity 
after  the  lapse  of   above  a  century. 

And   let    me    remark    on    what    different 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  47 

ground  the  question  stands  from  that  l)etween 
Episcopacy  and  Presbytery.  According  to 
the  pretensions  of  tlie  latter,  a  change  took 
place  all  at  once  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  and 
affecting  inghts  and  duties  in  daily  exercise, 
and  all  without  opposition  or  even  historic 
notice.  Such  a  change  could  never  have  hap- 
pened among  mankind,  constituted  as  we  see 
tliem.  But  it  is  otherwise  in  regard  to  new 
names,  easily  reconciled  by  analogy,  perhaps 
introduced  by  writers  of  celebrity,  by  them 
used  at  first  metaphorically  and  sparingly, 
with  an  intermixture  of  the  old  ;  the  change 
at  the  same  time  wearing  the  specious  appear- 
ance of  a  tendency  to  the  increase  of  piety, 
however  afterward  made  the  instrument  of 
the  most  inordinate  ambition. 

In  all  here  said,  I  have  been  aware  of  the 
solemn  caution  given  by  Dr.  Hickes  to  Chris- 
tian ministers  not  to  lessen  the  dignity  of  their 
calling.  But  if  it  is  the  scriptural  definition 
of  the  Jewish  high -priest,  that  he  was  "  or- 
dained from  among  men  for  things  pertain- 
ing to  God,"  is  it  less  honorable,  as  Dr.  Out- 
ram  is  re])resented  by  Dr.  liickes  saying  of 
the  Christian  minister,  that  he  is  *'  ordained 
by  God  for  things  pertaining  to  men  "?  And 
is  not  the  superiority  of  the   ministry  of  tlio 


48  NATURE  OF 

latter,  in  comparison  of  tliat  of  the  former, 
sufficiently  supported  by  the  comparative 
merits  of  their  respective  dispensations  ? 

When  Dr.  Plickes  pronounced  it  disgrace- 
ful in  a  minister  of  the  Churcli  of  England  to 
reject  priesthood,  sacrifice,  and  altar,  in  the 
strict  and  proper  sense,  why  did  he  not  crimi- 
nate the  Church  herself  ?  That  neither  sacri- 
fice nor  altar  is  found  in  her  liturgy  is  evident. 
And  as  to  the  word  "priest,"  that  she  con- 
siders it  as  "  ;rpfo'//r;r£po?,"  with  an  English 
termination,  appears  in  the  circumstance  that 
in  the  Latin  Prayer-Book,  which  is  of  equal 
authority  with  the  English,  "Priest"  is  not 
"  Sacerdos,"  but  Presbyter  ;  this,  even  in  the 
sacramental  service,  wliich  in  the  estimation 
of  Dr.  Ilickes  and  those  who  think  with  him 
is  in  the  most  eminent  degree  sacerdotal. 

I  have  already  intimated  that  I  distinguish 
betw^een  sacrifice  and  oblation.  And,  there- 
fore, I  never  could  perceive  any  reason  in  tlie 
objection  which  some  have  made  to  that  pai't 
of  our  consecration  of  the  elements,  in  whicli 
we  offer  them  to  the  Father,  as  typical  of  His 
blessed  Son's  body  and  Ijlood.  On  this  point 
of  oblation  the  testimony  of  the  apostolic 
Clement  is  express  ;  and  it  seems  involved  in 
tlie  act  of  our  Saviour,  when,  in  tlie  original 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  49 

institution,  He  invoked  a  blessing  on  the  ele- 
ments, in  which  act  there  must  have  been  a 
religious  presentation  of  them. 

To  me,  indeed,  it  seems  surprising,  that  the 
very  pains  which  some  authors  have  taken  to 
show  the  eucliarist  answerable  to  the  nniC 
under  the  law,  did  not  show,  at  the  same 
time,  that  it  cannot  answer  to  the  n^I  of  the 
same  econo)ny,  which  always  involved  the 
taking  of  animal  life.  And  there  is  a  consid- 
eration which  should  call  our  attention  to  the 
distinction.  It  is  the  countenance  which  may 
be  given  by  the  latter *word  to  the  gross  ideas 
found(!d  on  our  Saviour's  calling  the  bread  and 
wine  His  body  and  blood.  From  the  conjunc- 
tion of  this  error  with  that  of  considering  the 
eucharistic  service  a  sacritice,  there  seems  to 
me  to  arise,  by  a  natural  ti'ain  of  sentiment, 
the  monstrous  opini(jn  of  the  propitiatory  sac- 
rifice of  the  mass. 

I  beg  you  to  remai-k,  in  your  i-eading,  how 
authors  puzzle  themselves  to  frame  a  definition 
of  sacrifice  after  they  have  lost  siglit  of  that 
essential  property  of  it — ^the  death  of  tlie  vic- 
tim. Mr.  Johnson  bus  recited  a  variety  of 
definitions,  all  of  which  seem  grounded  on  no 
other  circumstances  than  their  suitinj;  the 
theories  of  their  respective  authors.  J)isliop 
4 


50  NATURE  OF 

Pearce  says  lie  lias  seen  "  almost  hundreds  of 
definitions  ;"  and,  after  all,  I  am  sorry  to  say 
of  tliis  ingenious  prelate,  that  he  seems  to 
have  chosen  or  made  one  principally  accom- 
modated to  a  favorite  point  with  him — the  ex- 
cluding of  the  passover  from  the  account  of 
sacrifice. 

When  I  require  the  death  of  the  victim  as 
essential  to  this  rite,  I  am  not  ignorant  of  the 
criticisms  on  the  Greek  word  ""Ova la."'  But 
I  have  nothing  to  do  with  them.  My  stress 
is  on  the  Hebrew  word,  which  confessedly  in- 
volves slaughter.  And  Ijesides,  whatever  may 
have  been  the  original  application  of  the 
Greek  wcrd  to  inanimate  (as  it  is  said)  as  well 
as  to  animate  objects,  I  believe  that,  when  tlie 
seventy  adopted  it  for  the  rendering  of  the 
Hebrew  word,  it  had  l)ecome  appropriate  to 
the  sacrifice  of  animals. 

As  to  Dr.  Hickes'  long  definition,  it  seems 
to  me  evidently  drawn  from  the  contempla- 
tion of  his  o^^^l  theory,  rather  than  having  any 
correspondency  with  the  institution  of  sacrifice 
in  Leviticus.  I  admit  Dr.  Ilickes''  alleged 
difiicultv  of  an  exact  definition.  But  when 
we  perceive  a  circumstance  applying  to  all 
sacrifice,  and  without  wliich  there  can  be  no 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  51 

sacrifice,  all  the  purposes  of  a  definition  may 
be  answered. 

Before  I  finish  let  me  request  you  to  be  as- 
sured that,  when  I  speak  so  fi-eely  of  great 
names,  it  is  with  a  sense  of  my  own  weakness, 
not^\atlistandin<i;  wliich  it  is  incumbent  on  me, 
in  resjiect  to  subjects  of  difference  between 
men  of  the  same  orrade  of  talents  and  learn- 
ing, to  make  an  opinion  for  myself. 

In  what  I  have  written,  my  purpose  is  to 
bring  some  little  aid  to  your  own  reflections. 
And  so,  connnitting  myself  to  your  candor 
and  imploring  the  divine  benediction  on  your 
inquiries,  I  remain  your  affectionate  friend 
and  brother. 

W>r.  AVurn:. 
Rev.  John  IIoBAKT.  I). I).,  Xew  York. 


LETTEIi    TI. 

Piin,.\nKr,iMiiA,  .Tunc  15,  1807. 
Kevkkexd  AM)  J)i:au  Sir  :  Wlien  T  wrote 
my  letter  of  the  8(>th  of  ()ctol)er,  T  made  a 
memorandum  of  a  few  i)articulars  connected 
with  the  subject  of  it,  on  wliich  I  wislicd  to 
express  my  opini(jn  ;  l)ut  delayed  this  because 
of   engagements  which   then    pressed.      Your 


52  NATURE  OF 

letter,  acknowledging  the  receipt  of  mine,  in- 
timated that  you  laid  some  stress  on  tlie  argu- 
ments adduced  in  it.  Tliis  aided  my  deter- 
mination to  taken])  the  subject  again.  It  has, 
however,  Ijeen  prevented  l)y  avocations  suc- 
ceeding upon  one  anotlier  ;  l)ut  now,  expect- 
ing a  favorable  opportunity  M'ithin  these  few 
days,  I  resume  the  corres])ondence. 

Tlie  points  which  I  propose  to  handle  are 
these  :  Is  there  in  the  Eucharist  a  sacriiice  ? 
If  not,  is  there  a  feast  on  sacrifice  ?  And  if 
neitlier,  what  is  the  import  of  its  being  the 
commemoration  of  a  sacriiice  ? 

The  introducing  of  the  third  (piestion  shows 
that  I  answer  the  first  and  the  second  in  the 
negative  ;  and  in  regard  to  tlie  first,  I  con- 
sider it  as  no  small  objection  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  eucharistic  sacrifice,  in  the  strict  and 
proper  sense,  tliat  they  wlio  afhrm  it  find  so 
great  dilficulty  in  agreeing  in  a  definition  of 
the  word  If  we  look  at  the  different  defini- 
tions of  learned  men,  as  cited  by  Mr.  John- 
son in  his  "  Unbloody  Sacrifice,"  they  are 
clearly  arbitrary.  So  is  his  own  ;  and  in 
order  to  prove  this,  I  will  detain  you  witli  an 
attention  to  its  contents. 

His  first  descriptive  circumstance  of  a  sac- 
rifice is  its  being  some  material  thing,  animate 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  53 

or  inanimate,  offered  to  God.  Here  I  recur 
to  the  principles  of  my  former  letter  ;  on  tlie 
ground  of  which  I  still  venture  to  ex})ress  my 
persuasion  that  the  Hebrew  word  denotiui;  sac- 
rifice means  animal  saci'ifice  only.  Mr.  John- 
son, indeed,  )nentions  the  fre(juent  use  of 
"  6x)ffia''  by  the  seventy  ;  and  he  wishes  that 
our  translators  had  followed  th.eir  example, 
putting  "  sacritice"  for  their  '"  Bvaicx  ;"  it  be- 
in|^  to  be  ])resumed  that  their  knowledge  both 
of  Hebrew  and  of  Greek  was  ade(piate  to  the 
occasion.  But  it  is  easy  to  account  for  their 
conduct  in  this  matter,  without  (juestioning 
their  skill  in  either  language.  ^Fr.  Jrdmson 
liimself  shows,  and  Pottei'V  Anti(|uities.  to 
which  he  refers  will  vonch,  for  him,  that  the 
word  "  Hvar'  had  anciently  a  more  extensive 
signification  than  that  of  slaughter.  1  ))resume 
that  it  had  n(»t  become  limited  to  this  when 
the  seventy  translated,  although  I  ha\e  inad- 
vertently and  mmecessarily  expressed  the  o])- 
posite  idea  in  my  formei*  lettei'.  The  error  is 
of  no  consc'(|uence,  as  to  the  matter  there 
treated  of  ;  but  ii*-- wi'iting  1  foi'got  the  ap]»li- 
cation  of  tlu'  woi-d  to  inanimate  olVcriug  in  the 
Septuagint,  which  is  indeed  vei'v  tiH'<|uent. 

^[r.  Johnson's  second  cii-cumstance  is,  '•  for 
the   acknowledi:;inu-    the    dominion   and   other 


54  NATURE  OF 

attributes  of  God,  or  for  procuring  divine 
blessings,  especially  remission  of  sins. ' '  If  this 
mean  no  more  than  that  in  the  eucharist  the 
devout  worshipper  has  a  view  to  both  these 
objects,  it  is  certainly  correct  ;  but  it  is  what 
the  ordinance  possesses  in  common  with  other 
acts  of  homage,  such  as  should  l)e  offered 
daily. 

The  third  circumstance  is  that  of  "a  proper 
altar  ;""  but  in  unfolding  the  sentiment  he  has 
said  more  against  than  in  favor  of  it,  as  in- 
volved in  the  idea  of  sacrifice. 

His  fourth  is  "  by  a  proper  officer  and  with 
agreeable  rites'" — certainly  fit  attendance  on 
all  public  exercises  of  devotion  ;  yet  no  fur- 
ther entering  into  the  idea  of  all  sacrifices  tiian 
in  the  sense  in  which  any  head  of  the  family 
may  be  called  a  proper  officer,  and  a  most 
simple  expression  of  devout  affection  an  agree- 
able rite. 

Ilis  last  circumstance,  that  of  consumption, 
seems  to  have  been  invariably  a  property  of 
sacrifice,  but  it  cannot  l)e  said  to  be  confined 
to  it.  I  believe  our  best  wi'iters  consider  the 
red  heifer,  in  Xum.  xix.  '1,  as  not  a  sacrifice. 

You  may  see  what  arl)itrary  accomits  of  the 
subject  are  tlie  consequence  of  losing  sight  of 
the  true  discriminatiui^  circumstance — that  of 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  55 

animal  slaughter  in  a  divinely  instituted  act  of 
devotion.  But  let  the  attention  he  confined 
to  this,  and  you  have  a  clear  view  of  the  na- 
ture of  an  institution  coeval  with  our  race, 
but  of  which  no  rational  account  can  be  given, 
except  as  prefigurative  of  the  great  sacrifice 
of  the  cross,  which  dispenses  with  every  other, 
although  to  be  itself  commemorated  by  a  spir- 
itual sacrifice  to  the  end  of  time. 

Before  my  sentiments  on  the  present  sub- 
ject became  settled,  as  I  trust  tliey  have  been 
these  many  years,  witli  little  probability  of 
change,  the  only  authority  adduced  from 
Scripture  wliich  ap])eared  to  me  to  liave  weight 
in  favor  of  the  docti'ine  wliicli  I  here  reject, 
is  the  well-known  passage  in  the  tenth  chapter 
of  the  Fii-st  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  It  aj:)- 
peared  to  nie  for  some  time  that,  as  in  the 
})aralk'l  drawn,  there  was  a  real  sacrifice  of  the 
heathen  and  a  real  sacrifice  of  the  dews,  so 
there  was  aj)pai-ent  ground  for  the  afiii'niing  of 
a  real  sacrifice  in  the  encliai-ist.  J5nt  this 
difiiculty  yielded  to  the  consideration  that 
nothing  is  more  common  than  foi'  a  matter  to 
be  predicable,  alike  of  the  things  signified  and 
of  its  sign.  A  dishonor  to  a  ])icture  may  ex- 
tend in  an  eqnal  degive  to  the  jxM'son  whom  it 
represents  ;  and  the  slighting  of  a  token  may 


56  NATURE  OF 

be  hostile  to  the  friendship  of  wliich  it  was 
designed  to  be  the  remembrancer.  In  like 
manner,  let  it  be  admitted  that  the  death  of 
Christ  is  a  sacrifice  in  the  strict  and  proper 
meaning  of  the  word  ;  and  that  through  the 
merits  of  this  sacrifice  the  bod j  of  His  profess- 
ing followers  are  related  to  Him  and  to  one 
another.  Let  it  be  further  admitted  that  the 
elements  of  bread  and  wine  are  the  apj^ointed 
figure  of  His  body  and  of  His  blood  ;  and  that 
by  partaking  of  these  symbols  we  recognize 
our  relation  to  Him  and  our  common  tie  among 
ourselves  ;  and  immediately  the  figurative 
sacrifice  of  Christians  admits  of  a  comparison 
with  the  real  sacrifices  of  the  heathen,  as  to 
the  purpose  in  contemplation  of  the  apostle — 
the  dissuading  from  l)eing  partakers  of  the 
heathen  sacrifices  ;  to  which  tliei'e  was  a  con- 
trariety in  the  figurative  sacrifice  of  the  Gos- 
pel, because  of  their  being  a  contrariety  in  the 
real  sacrifice  represented  by  it. 

But  if  it  sliould  be  granted  to  me  that  the 
passage  referred  to  is  the  only  one  which  can 
be  said  to  be  explicit  to  the  point  of  sacrifice, 
still  I  may  l)e  told  that  there  are  other  pas- 
sages from  which  Ave  may  deduce  the  doctrine  ; 
and  for  the  application  of  those  passages  I 
mav  be  referred  to  the  decision  of  the  fathers^ 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  57 

from  whose  works  very  many  authorities  have 
been  cited.  Here  I  make  a  distinction  be- 
tween the  earlier  and  the  hiter  fatliers  ;  and 
am  astonished  at  the  manner  in  whicli  they 
arc  cited  by  Mr.  Jolnison  and  others,  as  if 
they  were  of  eqnal  autliority  in  rehgions  con- 
troversy. If  our  Cliurch  is  riglit  in  tlie  deci- 
sion which  slie  makes,  witli  such  clear  evi- 
dence of  her  sense  of  its  importance,  that 
Scripture  is  the  only  rule  of  faith,  the  i^round 
on  which  the  fathers  can  be  at  all  appealed  to 
is  as  witnesses  of  the  faith  transmitted  to  them 
from  the  beginning  ;  and  that  their  testimony, 
on  the  general  principles  of  evidence,  may 
very  much  a^sist  in  determining  the  sense  of 
Scripture,  is  what  I  am  very  far  from  being 
disposed  to  deny.  J>ut  it  must  be  confessed 
that  in  this  point  of  view  the  effect  of  the  tes- 
timony depends  on  the  distance  from  the 
source  ;  and  it  is  a  mistake  to  put  a  father 
of  the  fouith  century  on  a  level  with  (»ne  of 
the  second.  To  illustrate  this  by  an  allusion 
X(\  civil  matters  :  Siip[)Ose  there  were  a  (pies- 
tion  as  to  the  iiiter[)rctation  of  a  law,  enacted 
in  the  beginning  of  the  I'cign  of  Tleni'v  \'11I., 
and  it  were  made  ajij^ear  that  one  sense  were 
more  favored  than  anothei"  by  the  opinion  of 
learned    counsel  'ami    by   the   practice   of    the 


58  -  NATURE  OF 

courts  in  tlie  reign  of  James  I. ,  and  tliis  were 
said  to  be  the  doctrine  of  tlie  intervening 
time,  it  is  a  consideration  which  would  liave 
weight  with  everv  mind  ;  while  much  less 
would  be  allowed  to  the  opinion  and  the  prac- 
tice of  the  present  day.  So,  in  bringing  apos- 
tolic faith  and  practice  to  the  standard  of  the 
current  sense  of  the  succeeding  times,  I  per- 
ceive a  clear  distinction  between  the  opinions 
of  a  Clement,  an  Ignatius,  an  IrensBus,  and  a 
Justin,  and  those  of  a  Chrysostom,  a  Cyril, 
and  an  Austin, 

Even  if  the  opinion  of  early  writers  should, 
as  such  and  distinct  from  testimony,  be 
thought  to  liavc  any  weight,  it  ouglit  surely 
to  be  confined  to  the  times  in  Avliich  not  a 
single  considerable  error  Iiad  pervaded  the 
Christian  Clnirch  in  general.  ]Xow,  wlien  you 
come  down  to  the  fourth  century,  I  think  I 
can  point  out  at  least  tM'O  errors,  which  had  a 
general  sway  at  an  early  period  of  it  ;  of  which 
one  is  the  lawfulness  of  persecution,  and  the 
other  the  celil)acy  of  the  clergy.  Oti  the  for- 
mer subject  I  distinguish  l)etween  the  not  ad- 
mitting to  a  share  of  })Ower,  and  the  inflicting 
of  ])ains  and  penalties.  The  former  may, 
under  some  circumstances,  be  laM'ful  and  CA'en 
necessary  ;  but  I  contend,  and  thiidv  you  \\\\\ 


THE  CHRT8TIAN' MINISTRY.  59 

agree  with  nie,  that  tlie  latter  is  in  contrariety 
to  the  Gospel,  and  yet  that  it  was  favored  by 
the  general  sense  of  the  Christian  Church  long 
before  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century.  On 
the  other  subject  1  do  not  mean  to  say  that 
they  as  yet  obliged  tlie  clergy  to  put  away  their 
wives  ;  and  we  have  an  evidence  to  the  con- 
trary in  the  celel)i"ated  story  of  Paphnutius  at 
the  Council  of  Nice.  But  even  the  story  im- 
plies, and  other  incidents  prove,  that  the 
Church  had  adopted  those  sentiments  concern- 
ing mariage  which  ended  soon  afterwards  in 
prohibiting  it  to  the  priesthood.  Now  you 
know  we  Protestants  consider  this  as  one  of 
the  tokens  of  aj)ostacy  })ro))hesied  in  Scri])ture. 
These  I'cmarks  seem  to  me  to  assist  in  esti- 
nuiting  the  sense  of  tlie  fatliers  of  diiferent 
periods.  In  regard  t(»  tliose  of  the  tiist  two 
or  three  ceiitni'ies,  T  am  ])ai'ti('ularly  aware  of 
wliat  has  been  said  by  Justin,  ]ty  livn;ens.  an<l 
by  Tei'tiillian.  Hut  I  tind  luttliing  wliich 
may  not  l)e  ln'ouglit  unck'i-  tlie  idea  of  obla- 
tion, that  is.  tlie  commemorative  preseiitatii^n 
of  the  ek'nients,  or  wliei'ein  tlie  a])])licarion  (^f 
the  word  '*  sacritiei'"'  (J-Uufux)  may  not  fairly 
be  understood  of  them.  a>  in  the  New  Tes. 
tament.  of  alm>.  I')e>i(les,  it  is  not  sni'prisinij: 
that    Justin     shonid    he   found   giving   to    the 


60  NATURE  OF 

word  the  same  extensive  signification  wliicli 
it  bore  in  the  Greek  translation  of  the  Scrip- 
tnres  in  daily  nse,  and  there  standing  for 
diifei'ent  subjects  denoted  in  tlie  Hebrew  by 
different  words.  I  beg  jon  to  consider  fur- 
ther how  difficult  it  has  been  found  bv  the 
writers  from  whom  I  dissent  to  Ijcnd  to  their 
system  what  Barnal)as  lias  said  concerning  the 
abolishing  of  the  legal  sacrifices,  to  make  way 
for  "  a  luunan  oblation  " — which  he  defines 
to  be  "an  huml)le  Jind  a  contrite  lieart  ;  in 
addition  to  this,  the  circumstance  in  the  obla- 
tion spoken  of  by  Clement,  that  they  were 
such  even  l^efore  consecration,  which  seems  to 
imply  a  reference  to  devotion  as  that  which 
principally  constituted  them  an  offering  ;  and 
further,  the  affirmation  of  Justin  that  ''  the 
only  pei'fect  and  acceptable  sacrifices  are  pray- 
ers and  thanksgivings  ;"'  with  expressions  to 
the  same  effect  in  Irentieus  and  several  others. 
On  these  authorities  I  might  be  tempted  to 
enlarge  for  their  elucidation,  were  it  not  that 
I  can  more  ex])editiously  refer  you  to  Dr. 
Waterlaud's  treatise  <>n  the  Eucharist,  in 
which  you  M'ill  find  tlie  al)ove-mentioned 
fathers  cleared  from  the  su])position  of  their 
having  asserted  a  material  sacriiice. 

In  rcirard  to  later  ecclesiastical   writers, "al- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRT.  61 

tliougli  I  lay  less  stress  on  their  opinions,  yet 
it  would  not  be  difficult  to  show  that  what 
they  have  said  rhetorically  is  often  improperly 
quoted,  to  the  neglect  of  passages  in  which  a 
different  sense  is  spoken.  No  father  has  de- 
livered himself  more  rhetorically  than  Chry- 
sostom,  as  Avhere  he  talks  of  "  the  tremendous 
sacriiice  lying  on  the  altar  ;'*  and  yet,  intend- 
ing to  distinguish  between  the  Jewish  system 
and  the  Christian,  he  says,  "  We  do  not  offer 
another  sacrifice,  but  always  the  same,  or 
rather  we  ])erform  a  memorial." 

I  began  witli  remai'king  how  difficult  certain 
writers  had  found  it  to  agree  among  them- 
selves in  a  definition  of  sacrifice.  On  this  ac- 
count thei'e  was  a  time  wlien  I  was  disjiosed 
to  look  on  tlie  ])resent  (picstion  as  merely  one 
of  words.  Ihit  wlien  I  came  to  consider  ma- 
turely tlie  opim'ons  which  go  along  with  the 
affirmative  side  of  the  (piestion,  in  the  writings 
of  those  who  hold  it  ;  and  when  1  j^erceived, 
as  I  thought,  a  train  (tf  sentiment  which  by 
a  consistent  ])rogression,  ended  in  tliewoi-st  of 
all  the  bad  tenets  of  Roman  Catholic  su})ei-sti- 
tion,  I  became  unea.sy  at  tiie  a])])earance  in  our 
Clmrch  of  any  of  that  leaven  which  has  shown 
itself  capable  of  leavening  the  whole  lump. 
For  this  reason   1  the  more  venerate  the  wis- 


62  NATURE  OF 

dom  of  our  reformers  in  their  liaving  Ijeen  so 
careful  to  clear  om-  system  of  every  thing 
which  participated  of  the  alarming  sentiment. 
In  my  former  letter  I  noticed  instances  of  this 
in  the  Latin  Prayer-Book,  in  their  carefully 
substituting  of  "  jn'esbyter"  for  "  sacerdos,'^ 
and  of  "  table"  for  ''  altar."  I  -svill  now  give 
you  another  instance  from  the  homily  on  the 
sacrament,  in  which  we  are  charged  to  "  take 
heed  lest  of  the  memory  it  be  made  a  sacri- 
fice." To  the  best  of  my  recollection  this 
continued  a  universal  sentiment  to  the  time  of 
Archbishop  Laud.  I  am  aware  tliat  ever  since 
Ids  day  there  have  been  a  proportion  of  the 
English  clergy  who  have  gone  into  the  senti- 
ment ;  but  am  mistaken  if  it  have  at  any  pe- 
riod pervaded  the  body,  and  especially  if  it 
have  been  ever  prevalent  on  the  Episcoj^al 
bench.  I  am  sorry  to  find  it  pressed  of  late 
by  some  writers  ;  and,  among  them,  am  par- 
ticularly sorry  tliat  Mr.  Daubeny,  whom  I 
much  admire  in  some  respects,  should  ha  one. 
In  regard  to  our  own  Church,  1  cannot  helj) 
anticijjating  bad  consequences  from  the  ex- 
ploded error,  as  I  consider  it,  being  taken  up 
by  any  of  our  clergy.  For  the  error  does  not 
end  in  itself,  but  lias  sundry  kindred  errors, 
some  of  which  I  proceed  to  specify. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  63 

One  of  them  is  tlie  remission  of  sins,  as  an 
end  of  tlie  celebration  of  the  eucharist.  That 
the  general  design  of  the  Gospel  is  to  make 
known  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  that  the 
ministry  are  clothed  with  power  and  authority 
to  declare  it,  are  trnths  not  to  be  denied. 
But  I  do  not  perceive  how  this  ap])lies  to  the 
sacrament  any  more  than  to  ordinary  occasions 
of  public  worshi]^,  when  we  confess  our  sins 
and  listen  to  the  authoritative  absolution. 
"What  occasion  for  this  if  there  be  a  more  sol- 
emn institution  for  the  accomplishing  of  the 
end  ?  In  the  Jewish  religion  there  was  no 
such  ordinary  and  constant  provisi<~»n  foi'the  re- 
lieving of  the  troul)led  conscience  of  the  peni- 
tent. Tie  had  no  resource  l>ut  tlie  ap])ointed 
sacritice  ;  and  if  the  cuclKii'ist  be  a  sacritice  in 
the  sense  of  his,  it  seems  to  make  snperflnous 
every  other  instrument  of  pardon. 

Another  docti'inu  connected  witli  it  is  that 
of  a  federal  rite,  holding  out  the  idea  that 
every  celebration  is  a  covenanting  anew.  But 
on  this  T  content  myself  with  refer]"ing  you  to 
Bishop  Pearce,  by  whom  it  has  l)een,  as  I 
think,  satisfactorily  confuted. 

I  might  bring  up  to  yc)u  again  all  those  dan- 
gerous sentiments,  as  T  consider  them,  of  Dr. 
Ilickes  which  I  stated   in   mv  former  letter  ; 


64  NATURE  OF 

as,  tliat  ministers  are  mediators  and  interces- 
sors for  tlie  people.  But  there  strikes  my  mind 
with  the  inost  force,  on  the  score  of  danger, 
that  in  consequence  of  the  metaplijsical  words 
of  the  institution  mau}^  express  themselves  so 
obscurely  concerning  the  elements,  as  shows 
that  they  have  confused  notions  of  something 
more  than  what  the  senses  perceive  of  mere 
l.»read  and  wine.  ISTow,  you  no  sooner  throw 
in  among  tlieir  indistinct  conceptions  the 
notion  of  a  matei'ial  sacrifice,  than  it  looks  so 
much  like  that  of  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for 
the  dead  and  living,  as  must  be  a  preparation 
of  the  mind  for  the  error  in  all  its  absurdity 
and  mischievous  tendency. 

Had  I  intended  a  full  discussion  of  the  sub- 
ject, I  have  written  far  too  little  :  but  I  fear, 
considering  my  plan,  far  too  much,  and  shall, 
therefore,  l)e  brief  on  the  next  question — of  a 
feast  on  sacritice. 

I  am  aware  how  very  eminent  the  characters 
are  who  have  patronized  the  affirmative  of  the 
question  ;  and  I  Hatter  myself  that  I  differ 
from  them  in  language  only.  That  tlie  eu- 
charist  resembles  tlie  peace-offerings,  and  not 
the  sin-offerings  of  the  Jews,  I  am  satisfied  ; 
and  it  makes  a  considerable  part  of  the  ground 
on  which  I  reject  the  opinions  before  spoken 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  65 

of.  Now,  this  distinction  enters  into  the 
whole  argument  of  a  feast  on  sacriiice  ;  and 
although  I  do  not  perceive  any  material  error 
resulting  from  it,  yet  I  am  dissatisfied  with 
the  mode  of  stating  the  subject,  because  it 
seems  to  inake  an  unnatural  conjunction  of 
literal  language  with  the  figurative.  In  this 
opinion  the  sacrifice  is  of  the  real  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  u])on  the  cross  ;  but  the  par- 
taking of  the  sacrifice  is  spiritual  numducation, 
that  is,  t/ie  due  conteTnplation  of  the  subject 
with  suitable  affections  j  for  I  never  could 
perceive  lohat  else  this  could  mean. 

I  have  an  ingenious  treatise  on  the  Lord's 
Supper,  written  by  Dr.  Bell,  Prebendary  of 
Westminster,  a  gentleman  with  whom  I  re- 
member to  have  dined  at  the  Bishop  of  Lan- 
dalf's  table.  Dr.  Bell  attacks  the  doctrine  of 
a  feast  on  sacrifice  on  another  ground,  which 
recpiires  the  supposition  that  even  the  sacri- 
fices of  the  peace-offerings  were  for  the  pur- 
pose of  expiation.  This  is  inconsistent  with 
the  idea  of  them  which  I  have  derived  from 
the  best  authorities,  and  which  seem  to  me 
agivcable  to  the  injunction  in  Leviticns.  I 
wish  Dr.  P>ell  had  been  nuire  full  on  this 
])oint  ;  hut  not  perceiving  the  correctness  of 
what    he    says    on    it.    T   must    object    to    the 


66  NATURE  OF 

doctrine   on  my  own   principles,   and  not  on 
his. 

You  see  I  am  reduced  to  the  necessity  of 
resting  the  eucharist  on  tlie  mere  ground  of  a 
memorial,  I  am  aware  that  by  this  I  subject 
myself  to  the  censure  of  Mr.  Daubeny  and 
others,  who  accuse  me  of  narrowing  the  sub- 
ject to  the  mere  memory  of  a  deceased  friend. 
Before  I  either  deny  the  charge  or  acknowl- 
edge any  reproach  in  it,  I  must  demand  an 
explanation  of  the  terms.  Suppose  I  were 
told  that  you  had  introduced  into  your  family 
the  stated  celebration  of  the  memory  of  a 
friend,  cherished  by  you  with  affection,  which 
you  took  this  way  of  expressing  and  perpetuat- 
ing. From  this  I  should  learn  no  more  of  the 
motive  of  your  proceeding  than  extraordinary 
regard.  But  if  it  were  in  consideration  of 
some  signal  benefit,  I  should  be  sensible  that 
this  might  have  been  far  short  of  any  thing 
involving  life  and  fortune.  But  suppose  me 
further  informed  that  the  favor  consisted  in 
dying  that  you  and  your  whole  family  might 
live,  and  this  without  your  having  merited  any 
favor  at  his  hands,  and  even  under  the  weight 
of  great  demerit  ;  and  then  I  perceive  that  it 
is  a  case  which,  beyond  any  other  that  con- 
cerns your  temporary  being,  challenges  tlie  un- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  67 

bounded  love  of  you  and  youi-s.  Now,  apply 
this  to  the  subject,  and  you  will  perceive  that 
the  doctrine  of  a  mere  memorial  gives  no 
such  degrading  representation  as  is  supposed 
in  the  language  which  has  been  bestowed  on  it. 

And  yet  the  comparison  does  not  reach  all 
the  points  comprehended  in  the  sacramental 
commemoration.  For  the  very  circumstance 
that  the  eucliarist  is  a  memorial  makes  it  "an 
outward  and  visible  sign  of  an  inward  and 
spiritual  grace."  The  grace  is  involved  in 
the  subject  conmiemorated,  and  therefore 
nmst  be  imparted  by  the  mean  of  the  celebra- 
tion. Not  only  so,  the  promises  of  (lod  are 
hereby  visibly  signed  and  sealed.  For  wliat 
less  is  the  matter  coTumemorated  than  the 
death  of  Christ,  as  *'  a  full,  ])erfect,  and  suffi- 
cient sacrifice,  propitiation,  and  satisfaction 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  woi'ld."  On  wliat 
are  the  divine  promises  founded,  l)Ut  on  the 
merits  of  tin's  transaction  i  And  liow  then 
can  it  be  celebrated  by  an  external,  a])j)ointed 
rite,  without  tliis  rite's  being  signiiicant  of 
promises  resting  on  a  truth  which  cannot  fail  ? 

Ih'slioj)  1  loudly  h;i.s  l)een  censured  for  giving 
a  diminishing  representation  of  the  ordinance 
in  (piestion,  in  his  "•  l*lain  Account  of  the 
Lord's  Suj)per  ;"   and  the  same  objection  lias 


68  NATURE  OF 

been  made  to  Dr.  Bell.  But  it  appears  to  me 
that  tlie  ground  they  have  given  for  the  charge 
is  their  neglecting  a  view  of  the  important 
truths  comprehended  in  the  idea  of  a  memo- 
rial. Whether  their  faith  were  imperfect  in 
this  respect,  is  more  than  I  shall  venture  to 
decide  on.  But  if  it  were,  or  if  their  reserve 
were  mere  omission  ;  in  either  case  there  is  a 
fallacy  in  ascribing  to  their  doctrine  of  the 
sacrament  that  which  may  more  properly  be 
ascribed  to  their  inattention  to  the  truths 
which  the  sacrament  was  intended  to  suggest. 

Let  the  decisions  and  the  services  of  our 
Church  be  carefully  attended  to,  with  a  view 
of  selecting  every  sentiment  and  every  expres- 
sion which  can  be  thought  to  ascribe  due  im- 
portance to  the  holy  institution,  and  to  its 
beneficial  tendency,  and  then,  if  there  should 
be  any  thing  not  clearly  involved  in,  or  deduci- 
ble  from,  the  idea  of  a  memorial,  I  shall  at 
least  think  myself  deficient  in  the  character  of 
a  minister  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  13ut  if 
nothing  further  should  be  found,  I  claim  the 
acknowledgment  that  what  is  believed  beyond 
it  should  be  held  and  taught  with  great  mod- 
esty and  forbearance. 

When  I  look  back  to  the  earlier  times  of 
the  Church,   I  think  I  perceive  the  gradual 


THE  GHB18TIAN  MINISTRY.  69 

manner  in  which  there  were  introduced  the 
notions  of  sacrifice,  priest,  and  altar,  with  the 
kindred  notion  of  the  succession  of  the  Chris- 
tian clergy  to  the  legal  priesthood,  and  of  this 
being  an  intended  figure  of  the  other.  No 
doubt  there  was  an  uuperceived  bias  to  this  in 
the  minds  of  holy  men,  on  account  of  the  uses 
which  they  thought  connected  with  it.  But 
whatever  temporary  uses  there  may  have 
been,  the  abuses,  as  a  natural  result,  have 
been  enormous  and  prominent,  and  this 
should  be  a  warning  to  us,  who  have  happily 
escaped  the  evil,  by  a  reformation  which 
would  never  have  been  achieved,  unless  by 
men  who  perceived  not  only  existing  errors, 
but  the  unsoundness  of  the  foundation  on 
which  they  stood. 

What  the  sense  of  the  reformers  was  I  con- 
sider as  clear  as  it  could  have  been  made,  and 
what  my  former  letter  stated  to  you,  concern- 
ing the  words  "  /^/jft;;,"  "  sacerdos,"  and 
"presbyter,"  and  I  revert  to  it  merely  to 
mention  an  idea  that  lately  occurred  to  me,  on 
accidentally  casting  my  eye  over  a  passage 
from  Dr.  Ilickes,  quoted  with  approbation  by 
Mr.  Daubeny,  in  the  312th  page  of  his  second 
volume.  What  could  Dr.  11.,  and  what  could 
Mr.  D.,  thought  I,  have  made  of  that  passage 


70  NATURE  OF 

if  it  had  been  written  in  Latin  ?  They  surely 
would  not,  in  defiance  of  the  sense  of  their 
Church,  have  given  "  sacerdos"  for  "  priest  ;" 
and  yet  had  they,  with  the  Church,  taken 
the  word  ' '  presbyter, ' '  the  whole  passage 
would  have  been  nonsense.  Is  it  not  evident, 
that,  so  far  as  our  system  is  concerned,  gentle- 
men avail  themselves  of  the  word  "priest" 
in  its  application  to  two  different  characters  ? 
Although,  therefore,  I  consider  our  use  of  the 
English  word  justifiable  by  its  etymology,  yet 
1  cannot  but  think  with  Mr.  Hooker  (book 
5,  sect.  78),  that  the  word  "  presbyter"  is 
*'  more  fit  and,  in  propriety  of  speech,  more 
agreeable  than  '  priest,'  with  the  whole  drift 
of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  ;"  still,  how 
ever,  acknowledging,  with  the  same  extraordi- 
nary man,  that,  "  as  for  the  people,  when 
they  hear  the  name,  it  draweth  no  more  their 
minds  to  any  cogitation  of  sacrifice,  than  the 
name  of  a  senator  or  an  alderman  causes  them 
to  think  upon  old  age,  or  to  imagine  that 
every  one  so  termed  must  needs  be  ancient, 
because  years  were  respected,  in  that  first 
nomination  of  both." 

If  I  were  to  give  vent  to  the  various  con- 
siderations which  occur  to  my  mind,  accord- 
ing to  the  various  points  of  view  in  which  the 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  71 

subject  may  be  placed,  my  letter  would  swell 
beyond  all  reasonable  bounds.  I  therefore 
give  over,  and  subscribe  myself. 

Your  affectionate  brother, 

Wm.  White. 

P.S. — I  hope  it  will  not  be  understood  that 
I  object  to  the  words  "  sacrifice"  and  "  altar," 
as  applied  figuratively  to  ecclesiastical  subjects 
This  may  often  be  done  with  great  propriety 
and  beauty,  without  danger  of  our  being  mis- 
understood. In  regard  to  both  words  the 
Scriptures  liave  set  us  an  example. 


II 


TESTIMONY 


REFORMERS  AND  MARTYRS. 


TESTIMONY 

OF    THE 

REFORMERS  AND  MARTYRS. 


Thomas   Cranmer, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury. — Martyred  1556. 

"This  is  tlie  honor  and  glory  of  this  our 
High-priest,  wherein  He  admittetli  neither 
partner  nor  suecc^mr.  For  by  liis  oAvn  ob- 
lation He  satisfied  His  Father  for  all  men's 
sins,  and  reconciled  mankind  unto  His  grace 
and  favor.  .  .  .  Another  kind  of  sacrifice 
there  is  which  doth  not  reconcile  us  to  God, 
but  is  made  of  them  that  l)e  reconciled  by 
Christ,  to  testify  our  duties  unto  God,  and  to 
show  ourselves  thankful  unto  Him.  And, 
therefore,  )they  be  called  sacrifice  of  Imid^ 
■prdtHi.,  and  ihanl'stgichig.  The  first  kind  of 
sacnfice  Christ  offered  unto  (ilod  for  us  ;  the 
second  kind  we  ourselves  oHer  to  (lod  by 
Christ,  And  by  the  first  kind  of  sacrifice 
Christ  offered  idso  us  unto  His  Father;  and  bv 


76  NATURE  OF 

the  second  we  offer  oursel/ves  o/nd  all  that  we 
have  unto  Him  and  His  Father.  And  this  sac- 
rifice generally  is  our  whole  obedience  unto 
God,  in  keeping  His  laws  and  commandments. 
And  St.  Peter  saith  of  all  Christian 
peo])le^  that  they  be  '  an  holy  priesthood,  to 
offer  spiritual  sacrifices  acceptable  to  God  by 
Jesus  Christ. '  .  .  .  And  Erasmus  calleth 
anapafiaxov  '  quod  in  alitim  tvansive  7ion 
potest.''  And  so  doth  adiadoxov  signify 
^  quod  successione  caret  y'  that  is  to  say,  'a 
thing  that  hath  )w  succession,  nor  posseth  to 
none  other. '  And  because  Christ  is  a  perpet- 
ual and  everlasting  Priest,  that  by  one  obla- 
tion made  a  full  sacrifice  of  sin  forever,  there- 
fore His  priesthood  neither  needefh,  nor  cam, 
pass  to  any  other  •  wherefore  the  ministers 
of  Christ's  Church  be  not  now  appointed 
priests  to  make  a  new  sacrifice  for  sin,  as 
though  Christ  had  not  done  that  at  once  sufii- 
ciently  forever,  hut  to  p read i  abroad  Chrlsfs 
sacrifice,  and  to  be  ministers  of  His  words 
and  sacraments. " — Works,  pp.  34:6,  363. 


Bishop  Ridley. 
Martyred  1555. 

Ridley's  Injunctions,  a.d.  1550. — His  opin- 
ion of  the  ministry  may  be  safely  inferred  from 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  77 

the  following  passage  :  "  Item,  Whereas  in  di- 
vers places  some  use  the  Lord's  board  after  the 
form  of  a  table,  and  some  of  an  altar,  where- 
by dissension  is  perceived  to  arise  among 
the  unlearned  ;  therefore,  wishing  a  godly 
unity  to  be  observed  in  all  our  diocese,  and  for 
that  tlie  form  of  a  table  may  more  move  and 
turn  the  simple  from  the  old  superstitious 
opinions  of  the  Popish  Mass,  and  to  the  right 
use  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  we  exhort  the  cu- 
rates, churchwardens,  and  <piestmen  here  pres- 
ent to  erect  and  set  up  the  Lord's  board 
after  the  form  of  an  honest  taJde,  decently  cov- 
eretl,  in  such  place  of  the  quire  or  chancel  as 
shall  be  thought  most  meet  by  their  discretion 
and  agreement,  so  that  the  ministers,  with  the 
communicants,  may  have  their  place  separated 
from  the  rest  of  the  ])eople,  and  to  take  down 
and  abolish  all  other    hi/  alfar.^  or  tables.'''' 

Kidlcy  is  sometimes  ;i])pealed  to  as  an  au- 
thority for  eucliaristical  adoration  on  the 
ground  of  the  following  pussage  :  "  AVe  do 
handle  the  signs  reverently,  but  ice  trorsJiip 
the  Sacrament  as  a  sacrament,  not  as  a  thing 
signitied  in'  the  Sacrament."  l>ut  he  uses  the 
word  ''  worshi})"  as  it  was  used  by  our  trans- 
lators in  Luke  xiv.  10  :  "  Thou  shalt  have 
worship   in   the   jn-esence  of  them   that   sit   at 


78  NATURE  OF 

meat  with  thee,"  where  it  plainly  means  no 
more  than  respect  or  honoi\  He  himself  ex- 
plains his  meaning  thus  :  "  Tliere  is  a  deceit 
in  this  word  adoramus.  We  worship  the 
symbols  when  we  reverently  handle  them." 
"  1  also  worship  Christ  in  the  sacrament,  but 
not  because  He  is  included  in  the  sacrament, 
like  as  I  worship  Christ  also  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, not  because  He  is  really  included  in 
them."     (Works,  p.  235.) 

Again  :  "  He  left  us  His  flesh.  This  you 
understand  of  His  flesh,  and  I  underetand  the 
same  of  grace.  He  carried  His  flesh  into 
heaven,  and  left  behind  the  communion  of 
His  flesh  unto  us."     (lb.,  p.  225.) 

Yet  again  :  "I,  being  fully  by  God's  words 
thereunto  persuaded,  confess  Christ's  natural 
body  to  be  in  the  sacrament  indeed  by  spirit 
and  grace,  because  that  M'hosoever  receiveth 
worthily  that  bread  and  wine  receiveth  effec- 
tuously  Christ's  body,  and  drinketh  His  blood 
[that  is,  he  is  made  effectually  partaker  of  His 
passion).''''     (lb.,  p.  274.) 


Bishop  Latimer. 
Martyred  1555. 

On  the  IStli  April,   1554,  Bishop  Latimer 
was    brought  out    of    prison,  that    he    might 


TH^  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  79 

publicly  answer  before  Queen  Mary's  com- 
missioners for  his  faith.  "  He  was  very  faint, 
and  desired  that  he  might  not  long  taiTy. 
He  durst  not  drink  for  fear  of  vomiting."  In 
the  course  of  the  disputation  the  following 
passage  occurred  : 

"  Weston. — So  through  tlie  whole  heretical 
translated  Bible  ye  never  make  mention  of 
priest  till  ye  come  to  the  putting  of  Christ  to 
death.  Where  find  you  then  that  a  priest  or 
minister  (a  minstrel  I  may  call  him  well 
enough)  should  do  it  of  necessity  ? 

"  Latimer. — A  minister  is  a  more  tit  name 
for  that  office,  for  the  name  of  priest  importeth 
a  sacrifice."  (Remains  of  Bishop  Latimer, 
p.  264.) 

In  the  "  Protestation"  given  up  in  writing 
concerning  certain  questions  to  him  ])roposed, 
Latimer  writes  thus  :  "  What  meaneth  St. 
Paul  when  he  saith  (1  Cor.  ix.),  '  They  that 
preach  the  Gospel  shall  live  of  the  Gospel  ? ' 
Whereas  he  should  rather  have  said,  The  Lord 
hath  ordained  that  they  that  sacrifice  at  mass 
should  live  of  the  sacrificing.  .  .  .  For 
Christ  Himself,  after  lie  liad  suffered  and  made 
a  perfect  sacrifice  for  our  sins,  .  .  .  com- 
manded His  disciples  to  go  })reacli  all  the  world 
over.      .      .      .      I)Ut    He  spake   never  a  word 


80  NATURE  OF 

of  sacrificing,  or  saying  of  mass. 
Therefore  sacrificing  priests  should  now 
CEASE  FOREVER  :  for  now  all  men  ought  to 
offer  their  own  bodies  a  quick  sacrifice, 
holy  and  acceptable  before  God."  (lb., 
p.  255.)  Another  manuscript  of  this  "  Prot- 
estation" reads  thus  :  "So  that  it  appeareth 
that  the  sacrificing  priesthood  is  changed  by 
God's  ordinance  into  a  preaching  priesthood, 
and  the  sacrificing  priesthood  should  cease 
utterly,  saving  inasmuch  as  all  Christian  men 
are  sacrificing  priests. "     (lb.,  p.  255.) 


William  Tyndale, 
Translator  of  the  New  Testament. — Martyred  1536. 

Tyndale,  the  martyr,  and  translator  of  the 
Scriptures,  said,  so  early  as  a.d.  1528  :  "  An- 
other word  is  there  in  Greek  called  Preshyter, 
in  Latin  Senior,  in  English  an  Elder,  and  is 
nothing  but  an  officer  to  teach,  and  not  to  be 
a  mediator  between  God  and  us.  .  .  .  By 
a  priest,  then,  in  the  New  Testament  under- 
stand nothing  but  an  elder  to  teach  the  younger, 
and  to  bring  them  unto  the  full  knowledge 
and  understanding  of  Christ,  and  to  minister 
the  sacraments  which  Christ  ordained,  which 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRT.  81 

is  nothing  but  to  preach  Christ's  promises. " 
(Works,  p.  256,  vol.  i.,  P.  S.) 


Thomas  Becon,  S.T.P., 
Chaplain  to  Archbishop  Cranmer. 

"What  is  the  Clmrch  of  Christ?  The 
whole  number  of  the  faithful  believers  in 
Christ's  coming,  sufferance,  and  resurrection  ; 
members  of  the  mystical  body  of  Christ, 
grains  to  make  one  loaf,  grapes  to  make 
one  wine,  lively  stones  to  build  on  a  spirit- 
ual house,  in  Christ  to  offer  spiritual  sac- 
rifices acceptable  to  God  through  the  same 
Christ  Jesus.  .  .  .  What  signilieth  this  name 
Christ  ?  Anointed  ;  whereby  it  may  be  gath- 
ered that  our  Saviour  Christ  is  a  king,  a  priest, 
and  a  prophet.  ...  A  ])riest,  because  He 
once  for  all  hatli  entered  in  sanetn  sanctorum, 
into  the  most  lioly  and  imici'most  tal)ernacle  of 
God,  and  hatli  offered  once  for  all  a  perpetual, 
sufficient  sacrifice  to  satisfy  for  all  men's  sins, 
and  to  purcliase  all  iiieirs  redemption,  not 
ceasing  now  to  be  a  perpetual  ^Lediator  and 
Intercessor  to  God  His  Fatlier  for  man,  .  .  . 
making  an  end  of  all  and  abolishing  all  sa(;ri- 
6 


82  NATURE  lOF 

fices  and  ceremonies,  which  were  but^shadows 
and  signification  to  put  the  Jews  in  remem- 
brance of  His  coming  before  He  came. 

"  By  His  priesthood,  with  the  holy  oil  of  His 
Spirit  He  hath  made  and  anointed  us  priests 
to  offer  to  God  the  Father  acceptable  sacri- 
fices through  Him,  which  are  the  sacrifices  of 
righteousness,  of  praise,  of  thanksgiving,  of 
an  humble  and  contrite  heart,  of  faith,  and 
wholly  to  crucify  and  offer  up  ourselves  unto 
Him  ;  and  by  the  same  office  we,  being  made 
partakers  by  Him  of  the  same,  may  be  bold  to 
come  into  the  sight  of  God  to  offer  up  our 
sacrifice  and  prayer. 

' '  What  is  a  priest  ?  An  officer  appointed  and 
licensed  of  God  to  present  himself  to  the  sight 
of  God,  for  to  obtain  His  favor  by  interces- 
sion, or  to  pacify  His  wrath  l)y  offering  up  of 
sacrifice  acceptable  to  Him. 

' '  What  is  a  prophet  ?  A  messenger  of  God 
to  declare  the  will  of  God,  either  in  showing 
the  threatenings  or  opening  the  promises,  or 
expounding  and  declaring  the  mysteries  con- 
tained in  His  holy  Word  or  will  to  us  His  chil- 
dren."    (Works,  p.  615.) 

"  The  true  and  Christian  absolution  is  noth- 
ing else  but  the  preaching  of  free  deliverance 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY,  83 

from  sin  by  the   death   of  Jesus   Clirist." — 
(Ibid.) 

John  Bradford. 
Martyred  looo. 

Bradford,  speaking  of  the  order  of  Mel- 
cliisedee,  whieli  Ijelongs  alone  to  Chri^^t,  says  : 
"  Otlier  orders  of  priests  I  read  none,  save 
that  which  all  Christians  he,  to  offer  up 
themselves  to  God,  and  other  spiritual  sacri- 
fices by  Christ,  and  the  order  of  '  Priests  of 
Batd,'  whose  successors  indeed  the  masses  be  ; 
for  else  if  they  were,  as  they  would  l)e  taken, 
of  the  order  of  the  apostles,  then  should  they 
be  ministers  an<l  not  massers,  pi-eachers  and 
not  traitore,  as  they  bo  ])()th  to  (4ud  and  His 
Church.  God  amend  them.'"  (Writings,  p. 
313,  vol  ii.,  P.  8.) 


.lonx  Piiir.i'OT. 
IVrartyrcd  I.")."). 

'*  Foi-  wliei'e  liatli  Christ  oivlaiiied  it  tliat 
any  person,  clothed  after  the  maimer  of 
playei's,  and  eountei-feited.  turned  fi'oin  the 
people,  standing  at  the  ahar,  u])()n  the  which 
is  set  a  cei'tain  liallowed  stuue,  })olish('d  with 
an  iron   insti'ument  conti-ary   to  the   law.  and 


84  NATURE  OF 

the  same  covered  with  two  or  three  altar 
cloths,  and  decked  to  pla^y,  as  it  vjere^  a  part 
in  an  interlude,  walking  now  in  this  side  and 
then  in  that  side,  and  tnrning  himself  hither 
and  thither,  mumbling  verses,  I  cannot  tell 
what  ;  and  at  length  he  must  hold  up  a  round 
piece  of  bread,  which  thej  call  an  host,  and  a 
cup  finely  made  for  the  people  to  gaze  upon, 
which  kneeling  behind  his  l)ack,  worshij)peth  it 
after  that  he  hath  lifted  it  with  his  hands  as 
high  as  he  can  above  his  head.  ...  I  dare 
boldly  afhrm  that  there  is  nothing  among  all 
the  devised  things  of  the  Papists,  wliich  l)e 
imiumerable,  nwre  ungodly  and  foul  y  l)y  the 
which  wretched  men  l)e  perverted  from  the 
tnie  worship  of  God,  and  l)y  the  which  God 
is  more  displeased,  the  l>enefit  of  Christ's  pas- 
sion more  obscured,  than  by  tin's  which  Flore- 
bell  calleth  '(and  not  he  only)  a  daily  sacrifice 
instituted  for  to  worship  God."  (Exam.,  p. 
408,  P.  S.) 


PociEK    II  UTCn IXSOX. 

01).  ir)5,-j. 

Mr.  Hunt,  in  his  History  of  Peligious 
Thought  (i.,  p.  38),  says  :  "  Hutchinson 
was   a   rational   Protestant,  and   what  in   the 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY. 

present  day  would  be  called  a  sober  Clmrch 
of  England  man.  The  Scriptures,  lie  said, 
allowed  three  orders  of  ministers — bishops, 
presbyters,  and  deacons  ;  but  priest,  in  the 
sense  of  sacerdoSj  is  never  found  in  the  Xew 
Testament,  exce})t  when  ajjplied  to  the  min- 
isters of  tlie  Jewish  law.  The  law  with  its 
priesthood  is  now  annulled.  Clirist  alone  is 
priest.  There  is  no  priesthood  l)ut  his,  and 
that  which  belongs  to  all  Christian  men, 
whether  ministers  or  lay  people.  They  have 
all  but  one  sacrifice  to  offer,  which  is  the 
sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  and  the  Hving  obla- 
tion of  their  own  bodies." 


nil. 


TESTIMOI^Y 


LEADING  ELIZABETHAN   DIYINES. 


TESTIMONY 


LEADING   ELIZABETHAN   DIVINES. 


Miles  Covekdale, 
Reformer  and  Translator. — 01).  I08O. 

''  So  that,  as  ye  liave  now  Christ's  one 
only  sacritice,  which  lie  Himself  on  the 
cross  offered  once  as  sufficient  for  all  that 
do  believe,  and  never  more  to  be  reiter- 
ated ;  so  have  yon  that  for  the  applyin<i;  of  it 
to  His  Clnirch  the  ministers  should  preach, 
and  pray  that  their  preaching  miij^ht  l)e  effec- 
tual in  Christ.''  (Works,  p.  257,  vol.  ii., 
P.  S.) 


AKciiiJisnor  Sandys. 

()I).   l.hSS. 


This  ])rel;itc  shows  that  the  pi-iesthood  of 
Melchisedec  and  Levi  !)eloui;-s  only  to  Christ, 
and    then    says  :     "  The    third    ])riesthood    is 


90  NATURE  OF 

that  wliich  is  common  to  all  ChristicCns  ^ 
for  '  He  hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  unto 
God  and  to  His  Father.'  Where  the  Popish 
priesthood  taketh  footing,  in  what  ground  the 
foundation  thereof  is  laid,  I  cannot  find  in 
Scriptures.  Antichrist  is  the  author  of  that 
priesthood  ;  to  him  tliey  sacrifice,  him  they 
serve."     (Sermons,  p.  411.) 


Bishop  Pilkixgtox. 
Ob.  1575. 

"  And  because  altars  were  ever  used  for 
sacrifices,  to  signify  that  sacrifice  which  was 
to  come,  seeing  our  Saviour  Christ  is  come 
already,  has  fulfilled  and  finished  all  sacri- 
fices, we  think  it  best  to  take  away  all  oc- 
casions of  that  Popish  sacrificing  mass  (for 
maintaining  whereof  they  have  cruelly  sacri- 
ficed many  innocent  souls)  to  minister  on 
tables,  according  to  these  examples. "  (Works, 
p.  547,  P.  S.) 


Address  to  the  Queex  agaixst  Altars. 

The  following  extract  from  a  paper  pre- 
sented to  tlie  queen  by  them  will  indirectly 
show  their  opinion  of  the  nature  and  func- 
tions of  the  Christian  ministry  : 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  01 

"  Reasons  why  it  was  not  convenient  that 
the  communion  should  be  ministered  at  an 
altar :  First.  The  form  of  a  table  is  most 
agreeable  to  Christ's  example,  who  instituted 
the  sacrament  of  His  body  and  blood  at  a 
table,  and  not  at  an  altar.  Secondly.  The 
form  of  an  altar  was  convenient  to  the  Old 
Testament,  to  l^e  a  figure  of  Christ's  bloody 
sacrifice  ujxjn  the  cross  ;  but  in  the  time  of 
the  New  Testament  Cyhrist  is  not  to  be  sac- 
rificed, but  Ilis  l)<)dy  and  l)l(>o(l  spiritually 
to  be  eaten  and  drunken  in  the  ministra- 
tion of  the  holy  supper.  For  re])resentation 
where(jf,  the  form  of  a  tal)le  is  more  conven- 
ient than  an  altar.  Tiiirdly.  The  Holy  Ghost 
in  the  New  Testament,  speaking  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  doth  make  mention  of  a  table,  1 
Cor.  X.,  J/cn.sv<  iJomhii,  i.»'.,  the  tabic  of 
the  J^ord  ;  but  in  no  })lace  nameth  it  an  altar. 
Fourthly.  The  old  \vriters  do  use  also  the  name 
of  a  table  :  for  Augustine  oftentimes  calleth 
it  Menmii)  Poinini,  that  is,  the  Lord's  tal)le. 
And  in  the  Canons  of  the  Nicene  Council  it  is 
divers  times  called  D'n'ina  Jf</h*^(f.  And 
Chrysostom  saitli,  B(ij)f/'s'?/in.s  uii>i.s  est  et 
Mt'thsn  11)1(1,  1.1'.,  tliere  is  one  baptism  and  one 
table.  And  although  the  same  writers  do 
sometimes  term   it  an  altai".  \et  are  thev  to  be 


93  NATURE  OF 

expounded  to  speak  ahuslve  et  improprie. 
For,  like  as  tbej  expound  themselves,  when 
they  term  the  Lord's  Supper  a  sacrifice,  that 
they  mean  by  this  word  sacrificiuni,  i.e.,  a 
sacrifice,  recordation  em  saerificii,  i.e.,  the  re- 
membrance of  a  sacrifice  ;  or  Similitudinem, 
sacrificii,  i.e.,  the  likeness  of  a  sacrifice,  and 
not  2)roperly  a  sacrifice  ;  so  the  same  reason 
enforceth  us  to  think  that,  when  they  term  it 
an  altar,  they  mean  it  a  representation  or  re- 
membrance of  the  altar  of  the  cross,  and  not 
the  fonn  of  a  material  altar  of  stone.  And 
when  they  name  it  a  table  they  express  the 
form  then  commonly  in  the  Church,  used  ac- 
cording to  Christ's  example.  Fifthly.  Fur- 
thermore, an  altar  hath  i-elation  to  a  sacrifice, 
for  they  be  correlatlva  :  so  tliat  of  necessity, 
if  we  allow  an  altar,  we  must  grant  a  sacrifice, 
like  as  if  there  be  a  father,  there  is  also  a  son  ; 
and  if  there  1)6  a  master,  there  is  also  a  servant. 
Whereupon  divers  of  the  learned  adversaries 
themselves  have  spoken  of  late  that  there  is 
no  reason  to  take  away  the  sacrifice  of  tlie  mass 
and  to  leave  the  altar  standing,  seeing  the 
one  was  ordained  for  the  other.  Sixthly. 
Moreover,  if  the  communion  be  administered 
at  an  altar,  the  godly  prayers,  etc.,  spoken  by 
tlie  minister  c^annot  l)e  heard  of  the  people, 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  93 

especially  in  great  churches  ;  and  so  the  people 
should  receive  no  fniit  of  this  part  of  English 
service  :  for  it  was  all  one  to  be  in  Latin,  and 
to  be  in  English  not  heard  nor  und,erstood  by 
the  people."  (See  Blakeney,  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  p,  64.) 


Bishop  Jewkl. 
01).  1571. 

"But  as  touching  tlie  inward  priestliood 
and  the  exercise  of  tlie  soul,  we  say,  even 
as  St.  Peter  and  St.  flolin  and  Tertullian 
have  said,  in  this  sense  every  Christian  man 
is  a  priest,  and  olfereth  unto  God  spiritual  sac- 
ritices  ;  inthis  sense,  I  ^ay,  and  none  otherwise. 

"  Xow,  if  any  man  shall  think  it  strange  to 
hear  a  layman  in  any  sense  called  a  ]iriest,  may 
it  please  liim  to  peruse  some  })art  of  that  liere- 
after  tolloweth  in  this  defence.  There  sliall 
he  tind  l)y  the  authorities  of  St.  Augustine, 
St.  Anil)rose,  St.  llierome,  and  St.  Clirvsos- 
tom,  that  whosoever  is  a  child  of  tlie  Cliurch, 
whosoever  is  l)a])tized  into  Christ  and  beareth 
His  name,  is  fully  invested  with  this  ])riestlioo(l, 
and  therefore  may  justly  be  callefl  a  priest. 
And  wheresoever  there  be  three  sneh  together, 
as  Tertullian  saitli,  ''  Yea,  though  they  be  only 


94  NATURE  OF 

laymen,  yet  have  tliey  a  Church. ' '  The  old 
Father  Origen  saith  :  Omnes  q%iicunq%ie  un- 
guento  sacri  chrismatis  delihuti  sunt,  fiunt 
sacer dotes  ("All  they  that  are  bathed  with 
the  ointment  of  holy  chrism  are  made 
priests").  St.  Angnstine  saith  :  Ilolocausturn 
Dondnicw  passionis  offert  quisqiie  f'po  jjec- 
catis  suis,  etc.  ("Every  man  offereth  up 
the  sacrifice  of  our  Lord's  passion  for  his 
sins").  Likewise  St.  Cyprian  :  Oranes,  qui 
Christi  noraine  dicuntur  Christiani,  offerunt 
Deo  quotidianura  saoriflcium,  ordmati  a  Deo 
sanctimon'ue  sacerdotes  ("  All  men  that  of  tlie 
name  of  Chi-ist  be  called  Christians  offer  up 
unto  God  the  daily  sacrifice,  Ijeiug  ordained  of 
God  the  priests  of  holiness").  Thus  we  see 
all  Cliristian  men  are  priests,  and  offer  up  to 
God  tlie  daily  sacrifice,  that  is,  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ's  passion.   .   .    . 

"■  But  you  Pi'otestants,  *'  ye  say,  "  liave  no 
external  sacrifice,  and  therefore  ye  have  no 
church  at  all. ' '  To  which  Jewel  answers  :  '  *  We 
have  tlie  sacrifice  of  prayer,  the  sacrifice  of 
alms-deeds,  the  sacrifice  of  praise,  the  sacrifice 
of  thanksgiving,  and  the  sacrifice  of  the  death 
of  Christ.  We  are  taught  to  present  our  ^i^x\\ 
bodies  as  a  pure,  and  a  holy,  and  a  well-pleas- 
ing sacrifice  unto  God,  and  to  offer  up  unto 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  95 

him  the  burning  oblation  of  our  lips.  '  These, ' 
saith  St,  Paul,  '  be  the  sacrifices  wlierewith 
God  is  pleased.'  These  be  the  sacrifices  of 
the  Church  of  God."  (Jewel,  vol.  iv.,  pp.  458, 
459  ;  see  also  vi.,  357.) 


KlCJfAKl)   llooKEK. 
Ob.  IGOO. 

"Touching  the  ministry  of  the  Gospel  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  whole  body  of  the  Church 
being  divided  into  laity  and  clergy,  the  clergy 
are  either  j^resbyters  or  deacons.  I  rather 
term  the  one  sort  presbyters  than  priests, 
because,  in  a  matter  of  so  small  moment,  I 
would  not  willingly  offend  tlieir  ears  to  whom 
the  name  of  priesthood  is  odious,  th<jugh  with- 
out cause.  .  .  .  And  if  we  list  to  descend  to 
grammar,  we  are  tohl  l)y  masters  in  those 
schools  that  the  word  j9/v"^',s-#  hath  his  right 
place  in  him  whose  function  or  charge  is  ''  the 
service  of  God."  Ilo\vbeit  liecause  the  most 
eminent  part  both  of  the  heathenish  and  Jew- 
ish service  did  consist  in  sacrifice,  when  learn- 
ed men  declare  what  the  word  priest  doth 
properly  signify,  accord  in(j  to  th<'  mi  ml  of  the 
Jirst  iriiposer  of  that  name,  their  ordinary 
scholies  do  well  expound  it  to  im])ly  sacrifice. 


96  NATURE  OF 

' '  Seeing,  then,  that  sacrifice  is  now  no  part 
OF  THE  Chukch  MINISTRY,  how  should  the  name 
of  priesthood  be  thereunto  rightly  applied  ? 
The  Fathers  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  with  like 
security  of  speech,  call  usually  the  ministry 
of  the  Gospel  priesthood^  in  regard  of  that 
which  the  Gospel  hath  proportionahle  to  an- 
cient sacrifices,  namely,  the  communion  of  the 
blessed  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  although  it 
have  properly  now  no  sacrifice.  As  for  the 
people,  when  they  hear  the  name,  it  draweth 
no  more  their  minds  to  any  cogitation  of  sac- 
rifice than  the  name  of  a  senator  or  alderman 
causeth  them  to  think  upon  old  age,  or  to  im- 
agine that  every  one  so  termed  must  needs  be 
ancient  because  years  were  respected  in  the 
first  nomination  of  l)oth. 

"  Wherefore,  to  pass  by  the  name,  let  them 
use  what  dialect  they  will,  whether  we  call  it 
a  priesthood  or  presbytership,  or  a  ministry,  it 
skilleth  not.  Althougli  in  truth  the  word 
preshyter  doth  seem  more  fit  and  in  propriety 
of  speech  more  agreeable  than  priest  with  the 
Avhole  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  Wliat  are 
churches  but  His  families  ?  Seeing,  therefore, 
we  receive  the  adoption  and  state  of  sons  by 
their  ministry  whom  God  hatli  chosen  out  for 
that  purpose  ;  seeing  also  that  when  we  are 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  97 

the  sons  of  God  onr  continuance  is  still  under 
their  care  which  were  our  progenitors,  what 
better  title  could  l)e  given  to  them  than  the 
revered  name  of  ^r/'^.s-^y^^/'.v,  or  fatherly  guides  ? 
The  Holy  Ghost  throughout  the  body  of  the 
Xew  Testament  making  so  mucli  mention  of 
them,  doth  not  anywhei'c  call  them  priests. 
The  prophet  Esay  1  grant  doth,  but  in  sncli 
sort  as  the  ancient  fathers,  by  way  of  analogy, " 
(Hooker,  Eecl.  P(j1.  v.  Ixxviii.,  2.) 


JoHx  Wiin<;iFT, 
Arclibisliop  of  ("unterburv. — Ob.  100:'. 

The  name  of  ])i-iest  need  not  be  so  odious 
unto  you  as  you  would  seem  to  make  it.  I 
suppose  it  cometli  of  this  word  ^>/V'.s7>y^r/', 
n<jt  of  Kdcerdon,  and  then  the  mutter  is  not 
great.     (Ibid.,  p.  4T<'.) 

I  am  not  greatly  delighted  witli  tlie  name, 
nor  so  desirous  to  maintain  it,  but  yet  a  tnith 
is  to  be  defended.  I  read  in  tlie  old  Fathers 
that  these  two  names,  sacerdos  and  pres])yter, 
be  confounded.  I  see  al>o  tliat  the  learned 
and  the  best  of  our  English  writers— such,  I 
mean,  as  write  in  these  our  days — translate 
the  word  ])resl)yter  so  ;  and  the  very  word 
itself,  as    it    is    used    in   our    English   tongue, 


98  THE  CHRISTIAN  MINI8TBT. 

soundetli  tlie  word  presbyter.  As  heretofore 
use  made  it  to  be  taken  for  a  sacrifice,  so  will 
use  now  alter  that  signification  and  make  it  to 
be  taken  for  a  minister  of  the  Gospel.  But  it 
is  mere  vanity  to  contend  for  the  name  when 
we  agree  of  the  thing."     (Ibid.,  p.  470.) 


IV. 

TESTIMOISY  OF  DIYIi^ES 

OF    THE 

SEVENTEENTH  AND  EIGHTEENTH 

CENTURIES. 


TESTIMONY  OF  DIVINES 

OF    THE 

SEVENTEENTH  AND  EIGHTEENTH 

CENTTIRIES. 


John  Hales, 
Of  Eton.— Ob.  1656. 

Principal  Tullocli,  in  liis  Rational  Theol- 
ogy, etc. ,  vol.  i. ,  p.  242,  says  of  liini  : 

"  The  brief  '  Essay  concerning  the  Power  of 
the  Keys '  is  also  highly  characteristic.  It  is 
a  clear,  sharp,  sensible  treatment  of  a  subject 
which  hundreds  of  pens  have  obscured  rather 
than  illuminated.  A  single  passage  will  suffi- 
ciently show  this  and  indicate  its  line  of  inter- 
pretation. Tlie  '"  Power  of  the  Keys"  is  sim- 
ply the  privilege  of  declaring  or  opening  the 
message  of  divine  love  to  nianhind.  It  has  no 
]-elation  to  any  priestly  or  judicial  function  in 
the  Cliristian  ministry.  And  all  who  liave 
themselves  received  the  divine  message,  or  to 
whom  the  kingdom  of  heaven  has  been  open- 


102  NATURE  OF 

ed,  have  equally  with  the  clergy  the  keys  of 
this  kingdom  committed  to  them.  ' '  Every 
one,  of  what  state  or  condition  whatever,  that 
hath  any  occasion  offered  him  to  serve  another 
in  the  way  of  life,  clergy  or  lay,  male  or  fe- 
male, whatever  they  be,  hath  these  keys,  not 
only  for  himself,  but  for  the  benefit  of  others. 

...     To   SAVE  A  SOUL    EVERY  MAN  IS  A  PRIEST. 

To  whom,  I  pray  you,  is  that  said  in  Leviticus, 
'  Thou  shalt  not  see  thy  brother  sin,  but  thou 
shalt  rej)rove  and  save  thy  brother  '?  And  if 
the  law  binds  a  man  wlien  he  saw  his  enemy's 
cattle  to  stray  to  put  them  into  their  way,  how 
much  more  doth  it  bind  him  to  do  the  like  for 
the  man  himself  I  Doth  not  every  father 
teach  his  son,  every  master  his  servant,  every 
man  his  friend  ?  How  many  of  the  laity  in 
this  age,  and  from  time  to  time  in  all  ages, 
have  by  writing  for  the  public  good  ])ropa- 
gated  the  Gospel  of  Christ  as  if  some  secret 
instinct  of  nature  had  put  into  men's  mind 
thus  to  do  ?  You  conceive  that  forthwith  up- 
on this  that  1  have  said  must  needs  follow 
some  great  confusion  of  estates  and  degrees  ; 
the  laity  will  straightway  get  up  into  our  pul- 
pits ;  we  shall  lose  our  credit,  and  the  adora- 
tion which  the  simple  sort  do  yield  us  is  in  dan- 
ger to  be  lost.     Sir,  fear  you  not  the  sufficient 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  103 

and  able  of  tlie  clergy  will  reap  no  discounte- 
nance, but  lion  or,  by  tins  ;  for  lie  who  knows 
liow  to  do  well  liiinself  will  most  willingly  ap- 
prove what  is  well  done  by  another.  It  is 
extreme  poverty  of  mind  to  ground  your  repu- 
tation upon  another  man's  ignorance  ;  and  to 
secure  yourself  you  do  well,  ])ecause  you  per- 
ceive, perchance,  that  none  can  judge  how  ill 
you  do.  lie  not  angry,  then,  to  see  others 
join  with  you  in  part  of  your  charge.  '  I 
would  all  the  Lord's  people  did  preach,'  and 
that  every  man  did  think  himself  bound  to 
discharge  a  part  of  the  common  good,  and 
make  account  that  the  cai'c  of  other  men's 
souls  concerned  him  as  well  as  his  own." 


Bishop  Stillixgflkkt. 
(JI).  1()!)9. 
In  his  "  Irenicum"  (p.  '2\'l)  lie  writes  : 
"  The  priests  under  the  law  were  never  or- 
dained by  imj)osition   of  Jiands,  as  the  elders 
and  rulers  of  the  syiiagogne  were  ;  and  if  any 
of  them  came  to  tliat  otKce,  tlicy,  as  well  as 
othei*s,  had  ])eculiar  designation  and  ap[)oint- 
ment  to  it.      It  is,  then,  a  common  mistake  to 
think  that  the  ministers  of  the  (Jospcl  succeed 
by  vows  of  corrcsponch'nce  and  auah)gv  to  the 


104  NATURE  OF 

priests  under   the  law — which   mistake   hath 
been  the  original  of  many  errors. ' ' 

He  argues  also  that  the  application  of  the 
name  of  priests  to  Christian  ministers,  natural- 
ly following  the  usage  of  the  term  among  both 
Jews  and  Gentiles,  has  led  in  process  of  time 
to  all  the  sacrificial  ideas  connected  with  it, 
and,  hnally,  to  the  mass  itself.  (See  Tulloch, 
"Rational  Theology  in  England  in  Seven- 
teenth Century,"  p.  451.) 


Arohbishop  Lkighton. 
Ob.  1G84. 

[Com.  on  1  Peter  ii.  9.]  "It  is  true  that 
the  external  priesthood  of  the  law  is  al^olished 
by  the  coming  of  this  great  High  Priest, 
Jesus  Christ  being  the  body  of  all  those 
shadows.  But  this  promised  dignity  of  spir'it- 
iial  priesthood  is  so  far  from  being  annulled 
by  Christ,  that  it  is  altogether  dependent  on 
Him  ;  and  therefore  fails  in  those  that  reject 
Christ,  although  they  be  of  that  nation  to 
which  this  promise  was  made.  Put  it  holds 
good  in  all  of  all  nations  that  believe,  and 
particularly,  says  the  apostle,  it  is  verified 
in  you.  You  that  are  the  believing  Jews, 
by  receiving  Christ,  do  also  receive  this  dig- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINI8TRT.  105 

nity.  As  the  legal  priesthood  was  removed 
by  Christ's  fulfilling  all  that  it  prefigured,  so 
He  was  rejected  by  them  that  were  at  His  com- 
ing in  possession  of  that  office  ;  as  the  stand- 
ing of  that  their  priesthood  was  inconsistent 
with  the  revealing  of  Jesus  Christ,  so  they 
that  were  then  in  it,  being  ungodly  men, 
their  carnal  minds  had  a  kind  of  antipathy 
against  Him. 

"  Kroyal  %wiesihoodA^  That  the  dignity  of 
believers  is  expressed  by  these  two  together, 
by  'priesthood  and  royalty^  teaches  us  tlie  worth 
and  excellency  of  that  holy  function  taken 
properly,  and  so,  by  analogy,  the  dignity  of 
the  ministry  of  the  Gospel  wliich  God  liath 
placed  in  His  Church,  instead  of  tliepriestliood 
of  the  law  ;  for  therefore  doth  this  title  of 
spirhual prledliood,  fitly  signify  a  great  privi- 
lege and  honor  that  Cliristians  are  promoted 
to,  and  is  joined  with  that  of  kings,  because 
the  proper  office  of  priesthood  was  so  honor- 
able. .  .  .  And  the  apostle,  we  see,  2 
Cor.  iii.,  prefers  tlie  ministry  of  the  Gospel  to 
the  priestiiood  (»f  tlie  law. 

'*■  They  are  not  shut  out  from  (lod  as  they 
were  liefore  ;  but  being  in  Clii-ist  are.  brought 
near  unto  Him,  and  have  free  access  to  the 
throne  of  llis  o-race  (Heb.  x.  21,  22).      Tliev 


106  NATURE  OF 

resemble  in  tlieir  spiritual  state  tlie  legal 
priesthood  very  clearly  :  1.  In  their  consecra- 
tion ;  2.  In  their  service  ;  and,  3.  In  their 
laws  of  living.     .     .     . " 


BiSnOP    BUKNET. 
Ob.  1715. 

"In  the  Epistle  to  the  Heln'ews  there 
is  a  very  long  discourse  concerning  saci'i- 
fices  and  frlests^  in  order  to  the  explaining 
of  Chi'ist's  being  both  'priest  and  sacrifice. 
There  a  priest  stands  for  a  person  called  and 
consecrated  to  offer  some  living  sacrifice,  and 
to  slay  it,  and  to  make  reconciliation  of 
sinners  to  God  by  the  shedding,  offering,  or 
sprinkling  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice.  This 
was  the  notion  that  the  Jews  had  of  a  priest  ; 
and  tlie  apostles,  designing  to  prove  tliat  the 
deatli  of  Christ  was  a  true  mcrifice,  brings  this 
for  an  argument  that  there  was  to  be  another 
priesthood  after  tlie  order  of  MeJchiseclec. 
He  begins  tlie  fifth  chapter  with  settling  the 
notion  of  a  priest  according  to  the  Jewish 
ideas  ;  and  then  he  goes  on  to  prove  that 
Christ  was  such  a  priest,  '  called  of  God,  and 
consecrated.'  Ihit  in  this  sense  he  apju-opri- 
ates   the   ])riesthood   of  the   new  dispensation 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  107 

singly  to  Christ,  in  opposition  to  tlie  many- 
priests  of  the  Levitical  law  :  '  and  tliey  truly 
were  many  priests,'  because  'they  were  not 
suffered  to  continue  by  reason  of  death  :  but 
this  man,  because  he  continueth  ever,  hath  an 
unchangeable  priesthood. ' 

"It  is  clear  from  the  wliole  tliread  of  that 
discourse  that,  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the 
word,  Christ  Himself  is  the  only  Priest  under 
the  Gospel  ;  and  it  is  also  evident  that  His 
death  is  the  only  sacrifice^  in  opposition  to  the 
many  oblations  that  were  under  the  Mosaical 
law,  to  take  away  sin  ;  which  appears  very 
plain  from  these  words  :  '  Who  needeth  not 
daily,  as  those  high-priests,  to  offer  up  sacri- 
fice, first  for  His  own  sins,  and  then  for  the 
people  ;  for  this  He  did  once,  when  He  offered 
up  Himself.'  He  opposes  that  to  the  annual 
expiation  made  by  the  Jewish  higli-priest, 
'  Christ  entered  in  once  to  the  holy  place, 
having  obtained  redemption  for  us  by  His  OAvn 
blood  ;'  and  having  laid  down  that  general 
maxim  that  '  without  shedding  of  blood  there 
was  no  remission,'  he  says,  '  Christ  was  offered 
once  to  bear  the  sins  of  many  ;  '  he  puts  a 
question  to  show  that  all  Kacr'ijices  were  now 
to  cease,  '  AVlien  tlie  wf)rslii[)))ers  are  once 
purged,  tlicii   would  not  siicrlfici  s  cease  to  be 


108  NATURE  OF 

offered  ? '  and  he  ends  with  this,  as  a  full  con- 
clusion to  that  part  of  his  discourse  :  '  Every 
priest  stands  daily  ministering  and  offering 
oftentimes  the  same  sacrifices,  which  can  never 
take  away  sin  :  but  this  man,  after  he  had 
offered  up  one  sacrifice  for  sins,  forever  sat 
down  on  the  right  hand  of  God. '  Here  are 
not  general  words,  ambiguous  expressions,  oi" 
remote  hints,  but  a  thread  of  a  full  and  clear 
discourse,  to  show  that,  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  words,  we  have  but  one  Priest,  and 
likcAvise  but  one  Sacrifice,  under  the  Gospel  : 
therefore  how  largely  soever  those  words  of 
priest  or  sacrifice  may  have  been  used,  yet, 
according  to  the  true  idea  of  a  propiatory  sac- 
rifice,  and  of  a  priest  that  reconciles  sinners  to 
God,  they  cannot  Ije  applied  to  any  acts  of 
our  worship,  or  to  any  order  of  men  upon 
eai"th.  ]S^or  can  the  value  and  virtue  of  any 
instituted  act  of  religion  be  carried,  by  any 
inferences  or  reasonings,  beyond  that  which  is 
put  in  them  by  the  institution  :  and,  there- 
fore, since  the  institution  of  this  sacrament  has 
nothing  in  it  that  gives  us  this  idea  of  it,  we 
cannot  set  any  such  value  upon  it  :  and  since 
the  reconciling  sinners  to  God  and  the  par- 
doning of  sin  are  free  acts  of  his  grace,  it  is 
therefore  a  high  presumption  in  any  man  to 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  IO9 

imagine  they  can  do  tliis  by  any  act  of  theirs, 
without  powers  and  warrants  for  it  from  Scrip- 
ture. Nor  can  this  be  pretended  to  'vvathout 
assuming  a  most  sacrilegious  sort  of  power  over 
the  attributes  of  God  :  therefore,  all  the  virtue 
that  can  be  in  the  sacrament  is,  that  we  do 
therein  gratefully  commemorate  the  sacrifice 
of  Christ's  death,  and,  by  renewed  acts  of 
faith,  present  that  to  God  as  our  sacrfice  in 
the  memorial  of  it,  which  lie  Himself  has  ap- 
pointed ;  by  so  doing  we  renew  our  covenant 
with  God,  and  share  in  the  effects  of  that 
death  which  He  suffered  for  us.  All  the  an- 
cient liturgies  have  this  as  a  main  part  of  the 
office,  that  being  mindful  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  or  commemorating  it,  they  offered  up 
the  gifts."     (Expos,  of  Articles,  p.  401.) 


AVIr,I.IA^r  Wake, 
Archbisliop  of  Canterbury. — Ob.  1737. 

"  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (ch.  x.  14) 
tells  us  that  Christ  onght  to  be  but  once 
offered,  because  hy  ihat  one  ofi'erinfj  He  lias 
fnlly  Kdflsfied  for  onr  s'ois^  and  has  i^er- 
fected forever  theui  th<d  are  sanctified.  If, 
therefore,  by  that  first  ofi'rrlne/  IJe  hath  fully 
satisfied  for  onr  sins,   then  is  there   no   more 


no  NATURE  OF 

need  of  any  offering  for  sin.  If  by  that  first 
sacrifice  He  hath  perfected  forever  them  that 
are  sanctified,  the  mass  certainly  must  he  al- 
togetlier  needless  to  make  any  addition  to  that 
which  is  already  perfect.  In  a  word,  if  the 
sacrifices  of  the  law  were  therefore  repeated,  as 
this  Epistle  tells  ns,  because  they  were  imper- 
fect— and  had  they  been  otherwise  they  should 
have  ceased  to  have  been  offered — what  can 
we  conclude,  but  that  the  Church  of  Rome, 
then,  in  every  mass  she  offers,  does  violence 
to  the  cross  of  Christ ;  and  in  more  than  one 
sense,  crucifies  to  herself  the  Lord  of  glory  ? 
Lastly,  the  Council  of  Trent  declares,  that 
because  there  is  a  new  and  proper  sacrifice  to 
be  offered,  it  was  necessary  that  our  Saviour 
Christ  should  institute  a  new  and  proper 
'priesthood  to  offer  it.  And  so  they  say  lie 
did,  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec,  in  opposi- 
tion to  that  after  the  order  of  Aaro?i  under 
the  law.  Xow,  certainly  nothing  can  be  more 
contrary  to  this  epistle  than  such  an  assertion  : 
both  whose  description  of  this  priesthood 
shews  it  can  agree  only  to  our  blessed  Lord  ; 
and  which  indeed  in  express  terms  declares  it 
to  be  peculiar  to  Plim.  It  calls  it  an  unchange- 
able priesthood,  that  passes  not  to  any  other, 
as  that  of  Aaron  did  from  father  to  son,  but 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  Ill 

continues  in  hiin  only,  because  that  lie  also 
himself  continues  for  evermore. ' ' 


Rev.  Daniel  Waterland,  D,D. 
Ob.  1740. 

This  distinguished  and  able  divine  is  not 
cited  as  holding  a  view  of  the  ministry  in 
entire  harmony  with  that  advocated  in  the 
introduction  to  this  book.  He  held  indeed 
"  that  Christian  ministers  are  2}riesfs  in  as 
high  and  proper  a  sense  as  any  before  them 
have  been  (Christ  only  excepted),  authorized 
to  stand  and  mmidei'  hetween  God  and  hi.i 
'people,  and  to  }Ae><s  in  GoeVs  name,  and  exe- 
cute all  other  sacerdotal  functions,  l)ut  in  a 
more  spiritual  and  heavenly  way  than  other 
priests  had  done"  (Works,  vol.  v.,  p.  181), 
yet  he  vehemently  rejected  ^Mr.  Johnson's 
doctrine  of  "  Thk  Unbloody  Sacrifk  k," 
and  maintained  that  tlie  only  sacrifice  in  the 
Christian  svstem,  even  in  the  Eucharist  itself, 
was  a  spiritaaJ  one,  the  sacrifice  of  ourselves, 
of  obedience,  of  a  good  life.  Moreover,  he 
affirms  that  "  rr  l>^  sklf-evidext  'inAT  wniLE 
WE  HAVE  Christ,  ave  w.\xj  xeithek  sacrifice, 

ALTAR,    XOR  I'RIEST   :  FOR   IX    HLM   WK   HAVE  ALl" 

(Ibid.,   p.    120)  ;    and   again,  '*  that   even   lay 


112  THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRT. 

Christians,  considered  as  offering^  spiritual 
sacrifices,  are  so  far  priests,  according  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  !N^ew  Testament  confirmed  by 
Catholic  antiquity  (p.  1 28).  And  again,  in  a 
noble  passage  :  ''  The  shadows  have  disap- 
peared :  and  now  it  is  our  great  gospel  privilege 
to  have  immediate  access  to  the  trite  sacrifice, 
and  to  the  triie  expiation  without  the  inter- 
vention of  any  legal  expiation  or  legal  sacrifice. 
To  imagine  any  expiatory  sacrifice  now  to 
stand  between  us  and  the  great  sacrifice  is  to 
keep  us  still  at  a  distance  w^hen  we  are  allowed 
to  drav^i  near  :  it  is  dishonoi'ing  the  grace  of 
the  Gospel  ;  and,  in  short,  is  a  flat  contradic- 
tion to  botli  Testaments"  (p.  148). 


V. 


TESTIMONY   OF   DIVmES 


PRESENT  CENTURY 


TESTIMONY  OF   DIVJNES 

OF    THE 

PRESENT    CENTURY. 


Dk.   Arnold. 

"  The  Christian  Church  was  absolutely  and 
entirely,  at  all  times  and  in  all  places,  to  be 
without  a  lunnan  priesthood.  The  relations 
subsist iiii?  between  God  and  man  were  fixed 
for  the  Christian  Church  from  its  very  foun- 
dation, and  they  bar,  for  all  time,  the  very 
notion  of  an  earthly  priesthood.  They  bar  it 
because  they  establish  the  everlasting  priest- 
hood of  our  Lord,  which  leaves  no  place  for 
any  other  ;  they  bar  it  because  ])riesthood  is 
essentially  mediation,  and  they  establish  one 
Mediator  between  God  and  man — the  Man 
(yhrist  Jesus.  And  therefore  the  notion  that 
the  sacraments  derive  their  etHcacy  from  the 
apostolical  succession  of  tiie  ministei'*  is  soex- 

*  So  far  is  it  from  true  (iiat  tiit!  necessity  of  apostoli- 
cal succession,  in  order  totrive  ellieacy  to  the  sacrament, 


116  NATURE  OF 

treniely  unchristian,  that  it  actually  deserves  to 
be  called  antichristian  ;  for  there  is  no  point 
of   the  priestly  office,   properly  so  called,  in 
which  the  claim  of  the  earthly  priest  is  not 
absolutely  precluded.     Do  we  want  him  for 
sacrifice?     l^ay,  there  is  no  place  for  him  at 
all  ;  for  our  one  atoning  Sacrifice  has  been 
once  offered,  and  by  its  virtue  we  are  enabled 
to  offer  daily  our  spiritual  sacrifices  of  our- 
selves, which  no  other  man  can  by  any  possi- 
bility offer  for  us.    Do  we  want  him  for  inter- 
cession ?     Nay,  there  is  One  who  ever  liveth 
to  make  intercession  for  us,  through  whom  we 
have  access  to  the  Father,  and  for  whose  sake 
Paul,  and  Apollos,  and  Peter,  and  tilings  pres- 
ent, and  things  to  come,  are  all  ours  already. 
His  claim  can  neither  be  advanced  nor  received 
without  high  dishonor  to  our  true  Priest   and 
to  His  blessed  Gospel.     If  circumcision  could 
not  be  practised,  as  necessary,  by  a  believer  in 
Christ  without  its  involving  a  forfeiture  of  the 

may  be  clearly  deduced  from  any  recorded  words  of  our 
Lord,  that  there  are  no  words  of  his  from  which  it  can 
be  deduced,  either  probably  or  plausibly  ;  none  with 
which  it  has  any  the  faintest  connection  ;  none  from 
which  it  could  be  even  conjectured  that  such  a  tenet  had 
ever  been  in  existence.  That  this  doctrine  comes  from 
God  is  a  position  altogether  without  evidence,  proba- 
bility, or  presumption,  either  internal  or  external. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  H? 

benefits  of  Christ's  salvation,  how  mu^h  more 
does  St.  Paul's  language  apply  ta  the  inven- 
tion of  an  earthly  priesthood — a  priesthood 
neither  after  the  order  of  Aaron  nor  yet  of 
Melchisedek  ;  unlawful  alike  under  the  law 
.and  the  Gospel  ! 

"  In  order  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  mis- 
understanding, it  is  proper  to  saj^  in  this  con- 
nection what  has  been  often  said  by  others, 
that  the  English  word  "  priest"  has  two  sig- 
nifications— the  one  according  to  its  etymology, 
through  the  French  lyretre  or  jy^^str^  and  the 
\jVii\n 2y>'<'sbyterus,  iroxw  the  Greek  itii^afivrE- 
pni  in  which  sense  it  is  used  in  our  Liturgy  and 
Rubrics,  and  signifies  merely  "  one  belonging 
to  tlic  order  of  presbyters,"  as  distinguislied 
from  tlie  other  two  orders  of  bishops  and 
deacons  But  the  otlier  signification  of  the 
word  "  priest,"  and  which  we  use,  as  I  think, 
more  commonly,  is  the  same  with  the  meaning 
of  the  Latin  word  sacer(lo-'<  and  the  Greek 
word  upfi'?,  and  means  "  one  who  stands  as  a 
mediator  between  (iod  and  the  people,  and 
brings  them  to  God  by  the  virtue  of  certain 
ceremonial  acts  which  he  performs  for  them, 
and  which  they  could  not  perform  without 
profanation  because  they  are  at  a  distance  tVom 
God,  and   cannot,  in   their  own    jiersons,  ven- 


118  NATURE  OF 

ture  to  approach  towards  Him."  In  this  sense 
of  the  word  "  priest"  the  term  is  not  applied 
to  the  ministers  of  the  Christian  Church,  either 
by  the  Scripture  or  bv  the  authorized  formu- 
laries of  the  Church  of  England  ;  although  in 
the  other  sense,  as  synonymous  with  presby- 
ters, it  is  used  in  our  Prayer-Book  repeatedly. 
Of  course,  not  one  word  of  what  I  have  writ- 
ten is  meant  to  deny  the  lawfulness  and  im- 
portance of  the  order  of  presbyters  in  the 
Church  ;  I  have  only  spoken  against  a  priest- 
hood in  the  other  sense  of  the  word,  in  which 
a  "priest"  means  ''  a  mediator  between  God 
and  man  ;"  in  that  sense,  in  short,  in  which 
the  word  is  not  a  translation  of  TrpefflSurspo?, 
but  I'sftev?.^'' 


Archbishop  Whately. 

"  The  introduction  into  Christianity  of  sac- 
erdotal priests,  altars,  sacrifices,  and  temples, 
which  is  so  utterly  repugnant  to  the  whole 
character  of  the  Gospel,  may  be  traced  l)oth 
to  Judaism  and  to  Paganism.  For  all  these 
things  were  common  to  them  both  :  though 
the  Jewish  priests  offered  sacrifices  to  the 
true  God,  and  the  pagan  priests  to  idols. 

''  The    priests    of    the    Isi'aelites    were    ap- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  119 

pointed  by  the  Almighty  Himself,  for  the  ex- 
press purpose  of  offering  sacrifices  in  the  name 
and  on  the  behalf  of  the  people  ;  they  alone 
were  allowed  to  make  oblations  and  burn  in- 
cense before  the  Lord  ;  it  was  through  them 
that  the  peo])le  were  to  approach  Him,  that 
their  service  might  be  acceptable.  A  very 
great  portion  of  the  Jewish  religion  consisted 
ill  the  performance  of  certain  ceremonial  rites, 
most  of  which  could  only  be  duly  j)erformed 
by  the  priests,  or  through  their  mediation  and 
assistance  ;  they  were  to  make  intercession 
and  atonement  for  offenders  ;  they,  in  short, 
were  the  rnedlators  between  God  and  man. 

''  And  among  the  pagans,  whose  institutions 
a})p('ar  to  have  l)een  in  great  measure  corrupt 
imitatioTis  of  those  of  the  patriarchal  religion, 
we  find,  in  like  maimer,  priests,  who  were 
j)rincipally  if  not  exclusively  the  offerers  of 
sacrifices  in  behalf  of  the  k^tate  and  of  indi- 
viduals— intercessors.  siij)|)licating  and  making 
atonement  for  othei's — mediators,  as  before, 
between  man  and  the  oltject  of  his  worship. 

"  The  ofhce  of  priest,  then,  in  that  sense  of 
the  word  which  we  are  now  considci-ing.  viz., 
as  e(pii\alent  to  hpi-r:,  being  such  as  luis 
been  descril)ed.  in  that  sense  is  .lesiis  Christ 
Himself,  to  whom  <'onsei|uentIv,  and  to  whom 


120  NATUBE  OF 

alone  under  the  Gospel,  the  title  is  applied  by 
the  inspired  wT-iters.  He  alone  has  offered  up 
an  atoning  sacrifice  for  us,  even  the  sacriiice 
of  His  own.  blood  ;  He  '  ever  liveth  to  make 
intercession  for  us  ;'  He  is  the  '  one  Mediator 
between  God  and  man  ;'  '  through  Him  we 
have  access  to  the  Father  ;  and  no  man 
Cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  Hinu'  As  for 
the  ministers  whom  He  and  His  apostles  and 
their  successors  appointed,  they  are  completely 
distinct  from  priests  in  the  former  sense,  in 
office  as  well  as  in  name.  Of  this  office  one 
principal  part  is,  that  it  belongs  to  them  (not 
exclusively,  indeed,  but  principally  and  espe- 
cially) to  preach  the  Gospel — to  instruct,  exhort, 
admonish,  and  spiritually  govern  Christ's  Hock. 
His  command  was  to  '  go  and  teach  all  nations,' 
'  to  preach  tlie  Gospel  to  every  creatm'e  '  ;  and 
these  Christian  ministers  are  called  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hel)rews  ^  those  that  bear  rule 
over  them,  and  watch  for  their  souls  as  they 
that  nnist  give  an  account. '  Now.  it  is  wortliy 
of  remark  that  the  office  we  are  at  present 
speaking  of  made  no  part  of  the  es})eeial  duties 
of  a  priest,  in  the  other  sense,  such  as  those  of 
the  Jews  and  of  the  pagans.  Among  the  for- 
mer, it^was  not  so  much  the  family  of  Aaron, 
as  tlie  whole'^  tribe  of  Levi,  that  seem  to  have 


TUE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  121 

been  set  aside  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  the 
law  ;  and  even  to  these  it  was  so  far  from  be- 
ing in  anj  degree  confined,  that  persons  of  any 
tribe  might  teach  pubHcly  in  the  synagogues 
on  the  Sabbath  day  :  as  M'as  done  by  our  Lord 
Himself,  who  was  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and 
Paul,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  without  any 
objection  being  i-aised  ;  whereas  an  intrusion 
into  tlie  priest's  office  woukl  have  Ijcen  vehe- 
mently resented. 

"  And  as  for  the  pagan  priests,  iJieir  busi- 
ness was  rather  to  conceal  than  to  explain  the 
niystcri(!s  of  tlunr  religion  ;  to  keep  tlie  people 
ill  darkness  than  to  enlighten  them.  Accord- 
ingly, the  moral  im])rovement  of  the  people, 
among  the  ancients,  seems  to  have  been  consid- 
ered the  pi-o|)er  care  of  the  k'gishitor,  whose 
laws  and  system  of  pubHc  eihication  generally 
had  this  object  in  view.  To  tliese  and  to  the 
public  (lisj)utations  of  pliilosophers.  but  not  at 
all  to  the  priests  of  theii'  reHgion,  they  appear 
to  have  h)oked  for  insti'uction  in  their  duty. 

''That  the  Christian  ministiw.  on  the  con- 
trary, was  appointed  in  great  measure.  If  not 
j)rincipaliy.  for  tlie  j)Ui'pose  of  giving  religious 
instruction  and  admonition,  is  clearly  proved 
both  l»y  the  practice  of  the  apostles  themselves. 


122  NATURE  OF 

and   by  Paiirs  directions  to  Timothy  and  to 
Titus.' 

"  Another,  and  that  a  peeuhar  and  exchisive 
office  of  the  (Hiristian  ministers,  is  the  admin- 
istration of  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and  of 
the  Lord's  Snpper.  But  tliis  administration 
does  not  at  all  assimilate  the  Christian  j^riest- 
hood  to  the  pagan  or  the  Jewish.  The  former 
of  these  rites  is,  in  the  first  place,  an  admission 
into  the  visible  Clinrch,  and  therefore  very 
suitably  received  at  the  hands  of  those  whose 
especial  bnsiness  is  to  rn.stnirt  and  examine 
those  who  are  candidates  for  baptism,  as 
adults,  or  who  have  l)een  l)aptized  in  their  in- 
fancy ;  and,  in  the  second  place,  it  is  an  admis- 
sion to  a  participation  in  the  gifts  of  the  Spirit, 
which  constitute  the  Cluirch,  '  tlie  temple  of 
the  Holy  (xhost.''  The  treasury,  as  it  were, 
of  divine  grace  is  then  thrown  (jpen,  to  which 
we  may  resort  when  a  sufficient  maturity  of 
years  enables  us  to  understaiul  onr  wants,  and 
we  are  inclined  to  ajjply  for  their  relief.  It 
is  not,  let  it  be  c»l)served,  througli  the  media- 
tion of  an  earthly  priest  that  we  are  ad- 
mitted to  otfer  our  supjilications  before 
God's  ]nercy-seat  ;  we  are  anthorized,  by 
virtne  of  this  sacred  rite,  to  a])pear  as  it  were 
in    His  presence  ourselves,  needing  no   inter- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINI8TBY.  123 

cessor  witli  the  Father  but  His  Son  Jesus 
Christ,  both  God  and  man,  '  Having  there- 
fore,' says  Paul,  '  holdness  to  enter  into  the 
hohest  by  the  blood  of  Jesus,  by  a  new  and 
living  way  which  He  hath  consecrated  for  us, 
and  having  an  High  Priest  over  the  house  of 
God,  let  us  draw  near  with  a  true  heart,  in 
full  asstiranee  of  faith,  having  our  hearts 
sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience,  and  our 
bodies  washed  with  pure  water. ' 

"  The  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
again,  is  not,  as  the  Romanists  unwarrantably 
pretend,  a  fresh  sacrifice,  but  manifestly  a 
celebration  of  the  one  already  made.  And 
the  rite  seems  plainly  to  have  been  ordained 
foi"  the  express  purj'xjse  (among  others)  of  fix- 
ing our  minds  on  the  great  and  single  oblation 
of  Himself,  made  I)y  the  only  High  Priest 
"once  for  all,"  that  great  High  Priest 
who  has  no  earthly  successor.  And  all  the 
communicants  are  alike  ])artakers,  spii-itually, 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  {!.e.,  of  His 
Spirit),  of  which  tliese  are  the  emblems,  pro- 
vided tli'tj  tJn'iiisrl rcs  ai'c  in  a  sanctified  and 
right  frame  of  mind.  It  is  on  the  j)ei-sonal 
holiness  of  the  communicant,  not  of  the  min- 
ister, that  the  efficacy  of  the  sacrament  de- 
])ends  :  //< .  so  far  from   ollVring  any  sacrifice 


134  NATURE  OF 

himself,   refers  them  to  the  sacrifice  ah'eady 
made  by  another. 

"  Such,  then,  being  the  respective  offices  of 
these  two  orders  of  men  (both  now  commonly 
called  in  English  '  priests  '),  but  originally  dis- 
tinguished by  the  names  Tliereus  and  Presby- 
teros,  we  may  assert  that  the  word  in  question 
is  ambiguous,  denoting,  wlien  thus  applied  to 
both,  two  things  essentially  distinct.  It  is 
not  merely  a  comprehensive  term,  embracing 
two  si)ecies  under  one  class,  but  rather  an 
equivocal  term,  applied  in  diiferent  senses  to 
two  things  of  diiferent  classes.  At  least  it 
must  be  admitted  that  what  is  most  essential 
to  each  respectively  is  wanting  in  the  other. 
The  essential  characteristic  of  the  Jewish 
priests  was  (not  their  being  ruhiisters  of  re- 
ligion, for  that,  in  a  certain  sense,  all  the 
Levites  were  ;  l)ut)  their  ottering  sacrifices  and 
making  atonement  and  intercession  for  the 
people  ;  whereas  of  the  Christian  minister  the 
especial  office  is  religious  instruction,  and  the 
administration  of  rites  altogether  difterent  in 
their  nature  from  the  offering  of  sacrifices, 
totally  precluding  the  idea  of  Jtis  being  the 
mediator  between  God  and  man.  And  the 
contrast  on  this  point  l)etween  the  Christian 
reliii'ion  on  the  one  hand,  and  all  that  exists  or 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  125 

ever  existed  besides  it  (including  the  Jewish) 
on  the  other,  will  afford,  if  we  rightly  consider 
when  and  by  wliom  our  faith  was  intro- 
duced, one  of  the  most  powerful  evidences  of 
its  truth. 

"  The  apostles,  though  attentive  to  the 
regular  government  of  the  churches  they 
founded,  ordaining  for  various  services  elders 
and  other  ministers,  male  and  female  (the  lat- 
ter being  known  by  tlie  title  of  ''  Widows"), 
yet  appointed  no  order  of  ])riests  in  the  sense 
of  Hicreus  (familiar  as  they  must  have  been 
with  the  name),  answering  to  the  sacrificing 
priests  of  the  .Jewish  and  of  the  pagan  relig- 
ions. The  same  observation  will  apply  to  the 
temple.  The  term  was  familiar  to  tlie  New 
Testament  writers,  but  it  is  never  once  ap- 
plied by  them  to  a  Christian  place  of  worship  ; 
always  to  the  worshippers  themselves  collec- 
tively— to  the  Christian  congregation,  as,  (^-.g., 
*  Know  ye  not  that  ye  are  tlie  tcni])le  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  which  (hvelleth  in  yon  ( '  '  Your 
body  is  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost. '  '  Ye, 
JUS  lively  stones,  are  builded  together  into  an 
holy  temple,'  etc. 

"  All  this  is  indeed  perfectly  intelligible  to 
any  one  who  understands  the  chai'actei-  of  our 
religion.      It  is   perfectly   consistiMit    with   the 


126  NATURE  OF 

gospel  scheme  ;  but  it  is  utterly  at  variance 
with  the  notions  which  would  naturally  have 
occurred  to  the  unassisted  mind  of  man.  A 
further  proof  of  this,  if  further  could  be 
needed,  is  furnished  by  the  changes  which 
were  introduced  in  after  ages.  The  very  in- 
stitution which  Christianity  in  its  pure  state 
had  abrogated  was  grafted  in  it  as  it  became 
corrupted  with  human  devices.  An  order  of 
priests  in  the  ancient  sense,  offering  pretended 
sacriiices  on  a  pretended  altar,  in  behalf  of 
the  people,  was  introduced  into  the  Christian 
scheme,  in  such  utter  contradiction  both  to 
the  spirit  and  the  very  letter  of  it,  that  they 
were  driven  to  declare  the  bread  and  wine  of 
the  eucharist  miraculously  changed  into  literal 
flesh  and  blood  offered  up  day  by  day  repeat- 
edly ;  although  tlie  founders  of  oui"  religion 
had  not  only  proclaimed  the  perfection  of  the 
one  oblation  of  our  Lord  by  Himself,  but  had 
even  proved  the  imperfection  of  the  Levitical 
sacriiices  from  tlie  very  circumstance  of  their 
being  repeated  *  year  by  year  continually  ;' 
inasnnich  as  they  would  have  ceased,  (says  the 
apostle)  to  be  offered,  if,  like  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ  '  once  for  all,"  they  could  "  liave  made 
the  comers  thereunto  perfect.'  Xow,  if  when 
the    religion    Juul   actually    l)een    established 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  127 

'unthout  altar,  withmtt  sacrijice,  \oithout  Priest 
on  earth,  all  these  were  introduced  into  it  in 
opposition  to  its  manifest  character,  throngli 
the  strong  craving  (if  we  may  so  speak)  of  '  the 
natural  man  '  after  tliem  ;  liow  mucli  more 
might  we  expect — with  wliat  com])lete  cer- 
tainty— that  men  brought  up  Jews,  and  liaving 
never  seen  or  heard  of  any  rehgion,  true  or 
false,  without  ])riests,  would  have  instituted, 
had  they  heen  left  to  themselves,  an  order  of 
sacrificing  priests  in  their  new  rehgion  ?  And 
how  certain  that,  since  they  carefully  abstained 
from  this  and  provided  against  it  in  terms  they 
employed — how  certain  that  tliey  were  not 
left  to  themselves,  l)ut  ])r()ceeded  under  the 
guidance  of  a  divine  director  :' 

"  The  corru]>tions  then  subsequently  intro- 
duced into  Chi'istian  cliinvhes  in  res])ect  of  the 
priesthood  do  in  reality,  by  showing  what  the 
tendency  of  huuuin  uai^rre  is,  go  to  prove  the 
superhmnan  origin  of  the  original  institution. 
These  have,  however,  afforded  gi'ound  for 
cavil  against  Christianity  itself,  to  those  wlio, 
ignorantly  or  designedly,  confound  the  I'eligion 
itself  with  this  ]ierversion  of  it. 

"  The  (ireek  and  Itoman,  and  some  other 
churches,  have  in  fact,  in  some  givat  degi"(>c. 
transformed  the  Presbyteros.  the  priest  of  the 


128  NATURE  OF 

gospel  dispensation,  into  tlie  Ilierens,  or  Le- 
vitical  priest  ;  thus  derogating  from  the  honor 
of  the  One  great  High  Priest,  and  altering 
some  of  the  most  characteristic  features  of  His 
religion  into  something  more  like  Judaism  or 
paganism  than  Christianity."  ("  Corruptions 
of  Christianity,"  Cyc.  Britt.,  pp.  510-13.) 


Bishop  Thiklwall. 

In  a  sermon  on  "'  Tlie  Apostolical  Com- 
mission," interj^reting  the  words,  "  Receive 
the  Holy  Ghost,"  as  used  in  our  ordination 
service,  he  says  :  ' '  This  is  no  vain  and  bold 
assumption  of  any  power  which  belongs  solely 
to  Him  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  a  hum- 
ble and  faithful  repetition  of  His  own  gra- 
cious 2)roniise  :  it  is  a  solemn  declaration 
that  the  persons  to  whom  these  words  are 
addressed  are  hereby  invested  with  this  office 
and  ministry  of  reconciliation,  and,  witli  all 
the  rights  and  privileges  pertaining  to  it,  are 
authorized  dispensers  of  the  means  of  grace 
committed  to  His  Church"  (Remains,  iii., 
364).  Again  :  '"  Consider  for  a  moment  the 
object  to  which  the  authority  in  question  (viz., 
in  John  xx.  21-23)  relates — the  remission  of 
sins — and  recollect  that  it  is  nothing  less  than 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  129 

the  object  of  the  whole  gospel  dispensation. 
In  the  remission  of  sins  every  blessing  of  the 
Christian  covenant  is  virtually  included.  .  .  . 
The  procuring,  therefore,  of  this  highest  good 
of  fallen  man  is  the  one  great  end  of  all  the 
institutions  and  ordinances  of  the  Church  of 
Christ.  Tlie  preaching  of  the  Word,  tlie  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  the  services  of 
the  sanctuary,  the  ghostly  counsel  and  advice, 
the  rules  and  exercise  of  holy  discipline — are 
all  designed  to  be  instrumental  to  the  remission 
of  sins.  All,  in  their  various  parts  and  de- 
grees, are  parts  of  the  ministry  of  reconcili- 
ation ;  and  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  for  sup- 
posing tliat  the  words  we  are  considering  ap[)ly 
to  one  more  than  to  another.  Tlie  authority 
given  may  well  be  considered  as  an  authority 
to  dispense  these  manifold  means  of  grace, 
cou])led  with  an  assurance  that  whenever  they 
are  rightly  received  they  shall  be  effectual  for 
the  purpose  for  which  they  were  appointed — 
the  remission  of  sins  ;  while  those  by  whom 
they  are  wilfully  and  obstimitely  rejected,  shall 
forfeit  the  proffered  benefit,  shall  find  the  gate 
of  mercy  closed  against  them,  shall  remain 
unreconciled,  unpardoned — shall  die  in  their 
sins.  And  then  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
which  accompanies  this  authority,  is  a  })romise 
9 


130  NATURE  OF 

tliat  this  Divine  Agent,  on  whose  operation 
the  efficacy  of  all  the  means  of  grace  entirely 
depends,  shall  never  cease  to  abide  in  the 
Clmrch  where  they  are  ministered,  shall  be 
ever  ready  to  impart  His  gracious  influence, 
and  to  shower  upon  them  the  quickening  dew 
of  His  blessing."     (Ibid.,  p.  363-4.) 

In  another  part  of  the  same  sermon  he  ex- 
presses himself  yet  more  strongly  :  "  It  is  cer- 
tain that  none  can  forgive  sins  but  God  only. 
This  is  not  denied  in  theory  even  l>y  those 
whose  language  and  practice  appear  to  trench 
most  upon  this  divine  prerogative.  And  from 
this  it  follows  tliat  no  absolution  given  by  man 
can  be  any  thing  more  than  a  declaration,  either 
general  or  particular,  that  sin  has  been  for- 
given by  God.  jSTow  such  a  declaration  is 
made  in  general  terms  whenever  the  Gospel  is 
faithfully  preached.  Such  preaching  is  in 
substance  a  statement  of  the  conditions  on 
which  forgiveness  is  bestowed.  But  if  the 
declaration  relates  to  a  particular  case,  it  is  evi- 
dent that,  without  a  special  divine  revelation, 
it  can  only  be  a  conditional  declaration  of  for- 
giveness, made  on  the  supposition  that  the  re- 
quired conditions  have  been  fulfilled.  Every 
Christian  has  a  warrant  to  say  to  his  l)ruther, 
'  Repent  and  believe,  and   thy  sins  shall  be 


THE  GHBT8TIAN  MINISTRY.  131 

forgiven  thee  ;'  but  before  he  can  say  with 
certainty,  '  Thy  sins  are  forgiven  tliee,'  he 
must  either  have  received  some  supernatural  as- 
surance of  tlie  fact,  or  he  must  qualify  the  dec- 
laration with  the  condition,  '  if  thou  repentest 
and  believest,'  and  this  condition  must  always 
be  understood  to  be  implied  where  it  is  not  ex- 
pressed ;  so  that  absolution,  in  whatever  form 
it  may  be  pronounced,  can  effect  no  real 
change  in  the  state  of  any  man  before  God, 
It  can  only  convey  the  same  kind  of  comfort 
as  is  imparted  by  every  proclamation  of  the 
rTos])el,  when  it  is  brought  home  to  a  truly 
penitent  and  beh'eving  soul."  (Ibid.,  p.  3<)3.) 
The  Bishop  thereupon  asks,  with  great  perti- 
nence, "  Bnt  thoTi,  if  this  is  the  whole  amount 
of  the  authority  conferred  by  the  words  of  the 
text,  ,  .  .  why  should  it  [the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost]  be  needed  for  this  exercise  of  the 
Christian  ministry  more  than  for  any  of  its 
other  functions  f     (Ibid.,  p.  3(i;3.) 


13 K.   Lkjutfoot, 
Bishop  of  Durham. 

"  The  kingdom  of  Christ  .  .  .  has  no  sac- 
erdotal system.  It  interposes  no  sacrificial  tribe 
or  chu'js  between  God  and  man,  bv  whose  in- 


132  NATURE  OF 

tervention  alone  God  is  reconciled  and  man 
forgiven.  Every  individual  member  holds  per- 
sonal communion  with  the  Divine  Head.  To 
Him  immediately  he  is  responsible,  and  from 
Him  directly  he  obtains  pardon  and  draws 
strength."     (Essay  on  the  Christian  Ministrv, 

P-  1.) 

"  So  it  was  also  with  the  Christian  priesthood. 

For  communicating  instruction  and  for  pre- 
serving j3ublic  order,  for  conducting  religious 
worship  and  for  dispensing  social  charities,  it 
became  necessary  to  appoint  special  officers. 
But  the  priestly  functions  and  privileges  of 
the  Christian  people  are  never  regarded  as 
delegated  to  these  officers.  They  are  called 
stewards  and  messengers  of  God,  servants  or 
ministers  of  the  Church,  and  the  like  ;  but  the 
sacerdotal  title  is  never  once  conferred  upon 
them.  The  only  priests  under  the  Gospel 
designated  as  such  in  the  Xew  Testament  are 
the  saints,  the  members  of  the  Christian  broth- 
erhood.    (Ibid.,  p.  12.) 

"  On  no  subject  has  more  serious  error  arisen 
from  the  confusion  of  language.  The  word 
'  priest '  has  two  different  senses.  In  the 
one  it  is  a  synonym  for  presbyter  or  elder, 
and  designates  the  minister  who  presides  over 
and  instructs  a  Christian  congregation  ;  in  the 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  133 

other  it  is  equivalent  to  the  Latin  sacerdos,  the 
Greek  upevs,  or  tlie  Hebrew  ]nr,  the  officer 
of  sacrifices,  who  also  performs  other  media- 
torial offices  between  God  and  man.  ,  .  .  Ety- 
mologically,  indeed,  the  other  meaning  is  alone 
correct.  In  the  apostolic  writings  we  find  the 
terms  ''offering,''  "sacrifice,"  applied  to  cer- 
tain conditions  and  actions  of  the  Christian  hfe. 
These  sacrifices  and  offerings  are  described  as 
spiritual  ;  they  consist  of  praise,  of  faitli,  of 
almsgiving,  of  the  devotion  of  the  body,  of 
the  convei-sion  of  unbelievers,  and  the  like. 
Thus,  whatever  is  dedicated  to  God's  service 
may  be  included  under  this  metaphor.  In  one 
passage  also  the  image  is  so  far  extended  that 
tlie  apostolic  writer  speaks  of  an  altar  pertain- 
ing to  the  spiritual  service  of  the  Christian 
Church.  If  on  this  nuble  scriptural  language 
a  false  su})erstructure  has  l)een  reared,  we  have 
here  uidy  one  instance  out  of  many  where  the 
truth  has  been  im])aired  l)y  ti'ansferring  state- 
ments from  the  region  of  metaphor  to  the 
region  of  fact. 

"Tliough  different  interpretations  may  be  put 
upon  the  fact  that  the  sacred  writers  through- 
out refrain  from  applying  sacerdotal  terms  to 
the  Christian  ministry,  1  think  it  must  be 
taken  to  signify  this  much  at   least  :   that  this 


134  NATUBE  OF 

ministry,  if  a  priesthood  at  all,  is  a  priesthood 
of  a  type  essentially  different  from  the  Je^'isli. 
Otherwise  we  shall  be  perplexed  to  explain 
M'hy  the  earliest  Christian  teachers  shonld  have 
abstained  from  nsing  these  tenns,  which  alone 
could  adequately  express  to  their  hearers  the 
one  most  important  aspect  of  the  ministerial 
office.  It  is  often  said  in  reply  that  we  have 
here  a  question,  not  of  words,  l)ut  of  things. 
This  is  undeniable  ;  but  words  express  things, 
and  the  silence  of  the  apostles  still  requires  an 
explanation.  However,  the  interpretation  of 
this  fact  is  not  hard  to  seek.  The  Epistle  to 
the  Hebi'ews  speaks  at  great  length  on  priests 
and  sacrifices  in  their  Jewish  and  Christian 
bearing.  It  is  jDlain  from  this  epistle,  as  it 
may  be  gathered  from  other  notices,  Jewish 
and  heathen,  that  the  one  j^rominent  idea  of 
the  priestly  office  at  this  time  was  the  function 
of  offering  sacrifices  and  thereby  of  making 
atonement.  Xow,  this  apostolic  writer  teaches 
that  all  sacrifices  had  been  consummated  in 
the  one  Sacrifice,  all  i^riesthoods  absorbed  in 
the  one  Priest.  The  offering  had  been  made 
once  for  all,  and  as  there  were  no  more  vic- 
tims, tliere  could  be  no  more  priests.  All 
former  priesthoods  had  l)orne  witness  to  the 
necessitv  of  a  Imman  mediator,  and  this  sen- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  135 

timent  had  its  satisfaction  in  the  person  and 
office  of  the  Son  of  man.  All  past  sacrifices 
had  proclaimed  the  need  of  an  atoning  death, 
and  had  their  antitype,  their  realization,  their 
annulment,  in  the  Cross  of  Christ.  This  ex- 
plicit statement  supplements  and  inteii^rets 
the  silence  elsewhere  noticed  in  the  apostolic 
writings. 

"  Strictly  accordant,  too,  with  the  general 
tenor  of  his  argument  is  the  language  used 
throughout  by  the  writer  of  this  epistle.  He 
speaks  of  the  Christian  sacrifices  and  of  a  Chris- 
tian altar  :  but  the  sacrifices  are  praise  and 
thanksgiving  and  well-doing  ;  the  altar  is  the 
congregation  assembled  for  common  worship. 
If  the  Christian  ministry  were  a  sacerdotal  of- 
fice, if  the  holy  eucharist  were  a  sacerdotal  act  in 
the  same  sense  in  which  the  Jewish  priesthoods 
and  Jewish  sacrifice  were  sacerdotal,  then  his 
argument  is  faulty  and  his  language  mislead- 
ing. Though  dwelling  at  great  length  on  the 
Christian  counterparts  to  the  Jewish  priest, 
the  Jewish  altar,  the  Jewish  sacrifice,  lie  omits 
to  mention  the  one  office,  the  one  place,  the 
one  act  which  on  this  showing  would  be  their 
truest  and  liveliest  counterparts  in  the  every- 
day worship  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  He  has 
rejected  these,  and  chosen  instead  moral  and 


136  NATURE  OF 

spiritual  analogies  for  all  these  sacred  types. 
Thus  in  what  he  has  said  and  what  he  has  left 
unsaid  alike,  his  language  points  to  one  and 
the  same  result."     (Ibid.,  pp.  141,  142.) 

"  Yet  it  would  be  vain  to  deny  that  a  very 
different  conception  prevailed  for  many  cen- 
turies in  the  Church  of  Christ.  The  apostolic 
ideal  was  set  forth,  and  within  a  few  genera- 
tions forgotten.  The  vision  was  onl}^  for  a 
time,  and  then  vanished.  A  strictly  sacerdotal 
view  of  the  ministry  superseded  the  broader 
and  more  spiritual  conception  of  their  priestly 
functions.  From  being  the  representatives, 
the  ambassadors,  of  God,  they  came  to  be  re- 
garded as  His  vicars."     (Ibid.,  p.  146.) 


Rev.  Canox  Pi;Row>,'E,  D.D. 

There  seems  then  no  tenable  ground  for 
Bishop  Moberly's  distinction  between  the  ])os- 
session  of  revealed  truth  and  the  possession  of 
the  power  of  absolution. 

To  exalt  the  latter  as  the  special  gift,  the 
undoubted  prerogative  of  the  clergy,  appears 
to  me  to  be  a  complete  inversion  of  the  true 
position  of  the  Christian  ministry. 

According  to  the  view  which  I  am  com- 
menting on,  ''  authoritative  teaching"  is    not 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  137 

80  specially  the  prerogative  of  the  clergy  as  are 
the  formal  acts  of  absolution  and  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments.  How  can  this  be 
maintained  ?  In  the  fii"st  place,  what  is  preach- 
ing itself  but  the  "  authoritative  declaration'^ 
of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  retaining  of 
sins  ?  St.  Paul,  speaking  of  the  ministration 
of  the  Gospel  at  large,  but  with  special  refer- 
ence to  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  says  : 
"  We  are  a  savour  of  life  unto  life,  or  a  savour 
of  death  unto  death"  (2  Cor.  ii.  12,  16).  Un- 
less, then,  the  power  of  preaching  is  a  part  of 
the  "  sacerdotal"  element  in  the  ministry,  it 
is  in  vain  to  contend  that  it  is  the  sacerdotal 
element  which  is  the  constituting  force  in  the 
ministry.  In  the  next  place,  taking  St.  Paul 
and  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  writers  as 
our  guides,  we  shall  lind  ourselves  placed  in 
this  dilemma  :  of  that  which  according  to  the 
theory  is  8U}){)osed  to  be  the  characteristic 
feature,  the  special  and  surpassing  j)rivilege, 
of  the  Christian  ministry,  they  are  wliolly 
silent  ;  wliereas  the  other,  which  is  nut  re- 
garded as  any  special  prerogative  of  the  min- 
istry, is  in  their  eyes  its  glory  and  its  strength. 
Thus  St.  Paul,  writing  to  the  Corinthians^ 
thanks  (xod  that  he  liad  baptized  but  few, 
adding,  "  For  Christ  sent  me  not   to  baptize. 


138  NATURE  OP 

but  to  preacli  the  Gospel,"  on  any  fair  inter- 
pretation of  the  words  implying  that  in  his 
estimation  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  was 
more  distinctively,  more  necessarily,  a  part  of 
his  office  than  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments. Again,  in  that  most  solemn  charge 
which  he  addresses  toTimothy,  as  chief  pastor  of 
the  Church,  what  is  it  that  holds  the  first  place 
in  his  thoughts  ?  The  power  of  absolution  ? — 
the  administration  of  the  sacraments  as  chan- 
nels of  grace  ?  J^o,  the  preaching  of  the  Gos- 
pel :  "  I  charge  thee  before  God,  and  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  judge  both  the  quick 
and  dead  at  his  apjDcaring  and  kingdom,  preach 
the  word." 

The  Apostles  must  have  known,  one  would 
suppose,  what  was  the  nature  of  their  connnis- 
sion,  as  given  them  on  the  resurrection  day. 
If  they  believed  that  they  were  then  consti- 
tuted priests,  somewhere  we  should  find  tliem 
insisting  upon  this  character  of  their  office. 
But  it  is  the  entire  absence  of  any  trace  of 
sucli  a  vicAV  of  the  Christian  ministry  in  the 
Acts  or  the  Epistles  which,  one  would  have 
thought,  must  strike  the  least  attentive  reader 
of  the  ]S'ew  Testament.  iS^owhere  is  the  name 
of  ''  priest"  given  to  the  Christian  minister  ; 
noM'here  is  his  office  described  as  "  a  priest- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  139 

hood."  This  is  not  because  the  mentions  of 
priests  or  a  priesthood  are  few.  It  has  been 
reckoned  that  there  are  no  less  tlian  one  hun- 
dred and  forty  of  such  references  in  the  Acts 
and  Epistles.  Yet  Qiot  once,  I  repeat,  is  the 
Christian  minister  ever  called  a  "priest" 
(ispevi),  or  his  office  a  "priesthood."  St. 
Paul  abounds  in  names  and  designations  of  the 
ministry.  He  calls  the  Christian  clergy  am- 
bassadors for  Christ,  stewards  of  the  mysteries 
of  God,  overseers  of  the  flock,  shepherds, 
evangelists,  ministers,  prophets,  but  never 
priests.  When  he  speaks  of  the  end  and  pur- 
pose for  which  that  office  was  instituted,  how 
does  he  describe  those  who  hold  it  :'  "  And 
he  gave  some,  apostles  ;  and  some,  prophets  ; 
and  some,  evangelists  ;  and  some,  })astors  and 
teachers,  for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for 
the  work  of  the  ministry,  for  the  edifying  of 
the  body  of  Christ,  till  we  all  come  in  the 
unity  uf  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of 
the  Son  of  God  unto  a  ]>erfect  man,  unto  the 
measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ" 
E})li.  iv.  11-13).  It  is  iin])ossible  to  conceive 
of  an  amj)ler  (lescri])tion  of  thesul)Hme  j)urj)ose 
for  which  the  Christian  ministry  was  instituted. 
And  yet  those  who  are  sent  to  do  this  woi-k- — 
purelv  the  irreatest  work  to  which  man  can  Ije 


140  NATURE  OF 

called — are  not  designated  as  ' '  priests. ' '  They 
are  apostles,  prophets,  evangelists,  pastore, 
teachers,  who  build  up  the  body  of  Christ,  and 
bring  it  to  its  destined  perfection,  but  they  are 
not  ' '  priests. ' '  Whereas  if  the  later  theory, 
and  especially  the  mediaeval  theory,  be  true, 
the  building  power,  the  power  of  edification, 
the  power  of  remitting  sins,  and  of  comforting 
and  guiding  each  individual  penitent,  resides 
in  the  Christian  minister  emphatically  as  a 
"  priest,"  not  as  a  "  prophet,"  or  "  evange- 
list, "  or  "  pastor, "  or  "  teacher. "  It  is 
scarcely  possible  to  conceive  of  any  more  glar- 
ing contradiction  than  that  which  is  to  l)e 
found  between  the  sacerdotal  theory  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  language  of  St.  Paul  on  the 
other.  With  the  one  the  pretension  to  be  the 
sole  channel  of  divine  forgiveness,  and  even, 
according  to  the  mediaeval  scholastic  and  Kom- 
ish  doctrine,  the  power  to  oifer  sacrifice  for  the 
quick  and  dead,  occupies  the  first,  if  not  the 
exclusive,  place  in  the  office  of  the  ministry. 
With  the  other  there  is  not  the  most  distant 
allusion  to  either  of  these  prerogatives. 

We  turn  next  to  the  Epistles  of  St.  Peter. 
If  the  Apostles,  as  a  body,  were  invested  with 
the  '"  priestly"  cliaracter,  to  him  individually 
the  ])riestly  powers  were  of  course  assigned  in 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY,  141 

a  very  marked  and  emphatic  manner.  We 
should  expect  him  to  claim  and  to  exercise 
these  powers  if  he  deemed  that  they  had  been 
solemnly  bestowed  upon  him  by  his  Lord. 
Yet  what  is  his  language  ?  Addressing  the 
saints  of  the  dispersion,  without  any  distinction 
of  order  or  office,  he  says  :  "  Ye  are  a  chosen 
generation,  a  royal  priesthood"  (1  Peter 
ii.  9).  Here  we  have  the  spiritual  priesthood 
of  the  whole  body  recognized.  Addressing 
the  clergy,  he  writes  :  "  The  presbyters  that 
are  among  you,  I,  who  am  your  co-presbyter, 
exhort''  (chap.  vi.).  In  the  earlier  portion  of 
the  Epistle,  where  he  is  enlarging  on  the  privi- 
leges of  all  Christians,  he  tells  them  that  they, 
as  "  living  stones,"  are  built  up  to  ])e  a  spirit- 
ual house,  an  holy  priesthood,  to  offer  spirit- 
ual sacritices.  If  he  is  Peter  (a  stone),  so  are 
they  ;  if  he  is  a  member  of  a  holy  priesthood, 
so  are  they  (chap.  ii.  5).  But  as  an  ordained 
apostle  and  minister,  he  calls  himself  a  pres- 
byter, and  notliing  more.  The  Ei)istle  to  the 
Hebrews  is  full  of  the  typical  signilicance  of 
the  Jewish  priesthood.  Put  not  once  is  it  said 
that  tliat  priestliood  has  its  counterpart  in  the 
Christian  ministry  ;  it  is  fulfilled  in  ('lirist.  and 
in  Christ  alone.  He  is  the  One  Iligli  Priest 
of  the  Church,  offering  the  one  perfect  sacritice 


142  NATUBE  OB' 

for  sin,  making  the  one  all -pre  vailing  interces- 
sion in  heaven.  Christians  are  spoken  of  as 
those  who  offer  spiritual  sacrifices,  the  sacrifice 
of  themselves,  the  sacrifice  of  praise  and 
thanksgiving  and  good  works  through  the  One 
Eternal  Mediator.  In  this  sense  all  are 
priests,  but  the  Christian  clergy  are  in  no 
sense  priests  in  which  the  Christian  laity  are 
not  the  same.  And  in  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews the  only  allusion  to  the  Christian  clergy 
is  to  them  as  exercising  rule  and  having 
authority  in  the  body  (chap.  xiii.  7),  "  Kemem- 
ber  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you. ' " 

If,  then,  we  are  to  interpret  the  passage  in 
St.  John's  Gospel  (xx.  23),  on  Avhicli  so  much 
stress  is  laid,  by  the  light  of  the  Epistles,  we 
must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Apostles 
never  regarded  the  commission  of  the  resur- 
rection day  as  a  sacerdotal  commission.  They 
did  indeed  magnify  their  oftice.  They  looked 
upon  it  as  one  of  unspeakable  grandeur  and 
importance,  but  mainly  because  they  con- 
sidered themselves  as  '"  aml)assadors'"  of  the 
"  King  of  Kings."  ''  As  my  Father  hath  sent 
me,  even  so  send  I  you."  Those  words  could 
only  be  understood  with  their  proper  limita- 
tions. For,  o])viously,  the  apostles  were  not 
sent  to  discharge  that  work    of    redemption 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  143 

which  was  the  one  prerogative  of  their  Lord. 
But  they  were  sent  as  He  was  sent  to  proclaim 
God's  love  to  sinners.  This  was  how  they 
understood  their  commission,  and  this  was  how 
they  exercised  it.  When  their  Lord  "  breathed 
on  them,"  what  did  the  act  signify  i  The 
"  breath"  is  the  "  spirit."  The  breathing  is 
inspiration  in  the  highest  sense.  Bnt  inspira- 
tion is  in  an  emphatic  sense  the  gift  of  the 
prophet,  not  of  the  priest.  It  is  the  gift  of 
the  preacher  of  righteousness.  It  is  the  power 
to  discern  spirits,  it  is  the  power  to  read  the 
heart,  it  is  the  power  to  work  mightily  on  the 
conscience,  to  penetrate  beneath  the  hard  crust 
of  ungodliness  and  sin,  to  lay  the  sinner  bare 
to  liimself  and  to  God,  whether  that  be  done 
in  the  public  preaching  of  the  Word,  or  in  the 
private  ministration  to  individual  men.  The 
})rophetical  spirit  is  the  spirit  of  the  Christian 
ministry.  It  is  as  a  prophet,  as  a  messenger 
from  God,  that  the  Christian  nn'nister  dis- 
charges every  part  of  his  otlice.  Thei'e  is  no 
more  force  or  efficiency  in  ])rivate  absolution 
than  there  is  in  pu])Hc  ;  there  is  no  more  neces- 
sary conveyance  of  grace  in  the  sacraments 
than  there  is  in  the  preaching  of  the  (-iospel. 
All  are  parts  of  one  great  and  merciful  pro- 
vision for  the  recovery  of  man  to  God.     The 


144  NATURE  OF 

grace  of  the  sacraments,  it  is  admitted,  is  not 
confined  to  their  administration  by  the  clergy. 
Why,  then,  draw  this  distinction  ?  Why  in- 
vest the  sacramental  remitting  or  retaining  of 
sins  with  a  priestly  character,  and  regard  the 
preaching  that  sins  are  remitted  or  retained  as 
if  it  were  inferior,  because  not  sacerdotal  in 
its  nature  ?  Xeither  is  sacerdotal.  The  Chris- 
tian ministry,  as  depicted  in  the  Acts  and 
Epistles,  is  incompatible  with,  is  directly  op- 
posed to,  the  nature  of  a  priesthood  and  sacri- 
fices. 

The  question  I  have  been  discussing  is  not 
a  question  about  words,  but  about  things. 
There  is  a  complete  difl^erence  of  conception 
as  to  the  position  of  the  clergy  in  the  Church 
and  the  nature  of  the  powers  which  they 
claim,  according  as  we  do  or  do  not  regard 
them  as  having  the  ''priestly  character.*' 
And  this,  I  take  it,  is  the  real  question  we 
have  now  to  face  in  the  Church  of  England. 
All  the  other  questions  which  have  of  late 
been  debated  with  so  much  heat  and  acrimony, 
the  use  of  vestments,  of  lights  and  incense  and 
crucifixes,  the  ritual  of  divine  service,  the 
eastward  position — these,  after  all,  only  mark 
the  real  question.  That  is  behind  all  these, 
and  they  would  have  no  importance  apart  from 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  145 

it.  Wliat  are  the  clergy  ?  Are  they  the  pos- 
sessors of  certain  mysterious  powers,  special 
gifts,  awful  prerogatives  wliicli  separate  them 
from  the  laity  ?  Are  they  "  priests"  to  exer- 
cise at  will  the  treuiendous  power  of  absolu- 
tion, to  call  down  Christ  from  heaven  at  their 
bidding,  to  olfer  sacrifice  for  sins  ?  or  are  they 
ministers  sent  by  Christ  to  preach  Ilis  Gospel, 
and  solenmly  set  apart  to  this  work  by  those 
"  who  have  public  authority  given  unto  them 
in  the  congregation  to  call  and  send  ministers 
into  the  Lord's  vineyard  T'  Are  they  inter- 
mediaries between  man  and  God  without 
whose  intervention  pardon  and  grace  cannot 
be  obtained  ?  or  is  it  their  office  to  preach  not 
tliemselves,  but  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  to 
invite,  to  persuade,  to  entreat  men,  in  Christ's 
name,  to  be  reconciled  unto  God  ?  Taking 
the  New  Testament  as  our  guide,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  about  tlie  answer.  Tlie  answer 
which  is  ■gwiiw  h\  tlie  Churcli  of  liome,  and 
by  too  many  in  our  own  Church,  is  drawn 
from  rlie  treatises  of  media'val  scholasticism, 
seeking  to  iind  sui)})ort  for  a  gigantic  system 
of  fraud,  im])osturc,  aiid  corruption.  The 
sacerdotal  system  is  the  fi'uit  and  tlie  growth 
of  ages  of  ignorance,  superstition,  immorahty, 
and  crime.  That  arrogant  lording  it  over 
10 


146  NATURE  OF 

God's  heritage  is  directly  opposed  to  the  apos- 
tohc  conception  of  the  ministry.  If  the 
Church  of  England  is  trae  to  herself,  if  she 
will  shine  forth  in  her  Reformation  splendor, 
if  she  will  maintain  her  place  as  God's  best 
gift  to  England,  she  can  only  do  so  by  holding 
fast  to  that  conception  of  the  Christian  min- 
istry, its  authority,  and  its  nature,  which  is  to  be 
found  in  the  inspired  writings  of  those  M'ho  first 
received  and  handed  down  the  apostolical  com- 
mission.—  Co7itern])orary  Revieio,  Dec.  1877. 


G.  A.  Jacob,  D.D., 

Late  Head-Master  of  Christ's  Hospital. 

The  simple  account  of  the  public  services 
of  Christian  ministers,  which  is  given  l)y  Jus- 
tin Martyr,  towards  the  middle  of  tlie  second 
century,  shows  that  very  little  deviation  from 
the  apostolic  practice  had  then  taken  place  ; 
and  from  the  testimony  of  otlier  Christian 
authors,  together  with  the  taunts  of  Pagan 
adversaries,  it  apj^ears  probable  that  during 
the  course  of  this  century  the  essential  charac- 
ter of  the  original  office  continued  to  be  pre- 
served. By  the  commencement  of  the  third 
century,  hoM'ever,  this  apostolic  simplicity  had 
begun  to  be  greatly  marred  by  the  assumption 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  147 

of  a  more  ostentatious  style  of  ministration, 
and  a  more  imposing  antliority.  The  Chris- 
tian ministry  was  now  changed  into  a  Priest- 
hood diiiQv  the  model  of  the  Levitical  Law.* 
Bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons,  became 
high-priests,  priests,  and  Levites,  and  were 
gradually  more  and  more  regarded  as  a  medi- 
ating, sacrificing,  and  absolving  order,  stand- 
ing between  God  and  the  general  body  of 
Christian  men.  Before  this  the  reproach  cast 
by  Pagans  against  the  Christian  Church,  that 
it  had  no  temples,  altars,  priests,  or  sacri- 
fices, had  been  its  praise  and  glory  ;  for  its 
tem])le  was  the  whole  world,  or  wherever  two 
or  three  were  gathered  together  in  the  Sav- 
iour's name  ;  its  altar  was  the  cross  ;  its  priest 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  at  once  the  Priest  and 
tlie  all-sufficient  sacrifice.  And  the  only 
earthly  priesthood  was  confined  to  no  sacerdo- 
tal cast,  or  tribe,  or  separated  order  ;  but  was 

*  Jerome  expressly  says  that  the  scheme  of  a  priest- 
hood in  tlie  Christian  C'hnrch  was  taken  from  the  Old 
Testament.  "  Et  lit  sciamiis  traditiones  apostolicas 
svimptas  de  veteri  testamento,  quod  Aaron,  et  filii  ejus, 
.atque  Levitoe  in  templo  fuerunt,  hoc  sibi  Episcopi,  et 
Presbyteri,  et  Diaconi  vindicent  in  Ecclesia." — "  Epist. 
ad  Evagrium,"  Hie  end. 

Accordingly  a  bishop  was  then  often  called  'Apj«fp£i)S 
or  Suinmus  SdcerdoK,  a  presbyter  'Icpeii  or  Sucerdoif,  and 
a  deacon  ActtV^S  or  I^viUt. 


148  NATURE  OF 

coextensive  with  the  wliole  community  of  the 
faithful,  who  in  a  figm'ative  or  spiritual  mean- 
ing were  kings  and  priests  nnto  God  in  Christ. 
But  now  the  leaven  of  Jewish  and  of  Pagan 
influences,  which  from  the  first  had  been 
working  insidiously  in  the  Church,  although 
the  religious  systems  from  which  they  sprang 
were  formally  renounced  and  resisted,  began 
to  make  itself  felt  and  seen  ;  and  as  the  inner 
life  of  the  Church  declined  in  spirituality,  and 
lost  its  firm  hold  of  apostolic  truth,  its  out- 
ward form  and  show  became  more  prominent 
and  presuming,  and  challenged  more  attention 
from  the  world. 

Tertullian*  is  the  first  Christian  author  Ijy 

*  This  change  had  been  gradually  approaching,  but 
distinctly  appears  first  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century.  Thus  TertullTiin,  "  Dandi  baptismum  ciuidem 
jus  habet  surnmus  Sdcerdos,  qui  est  Episcopys.'' — "  De 
Bapt."  17. 

"  Vani  eriinus  si  putaverimus,  quod  sacerdotibus  uon 
liceat,  Laicis  licere." — "  Exhort.  Cast."  7. 

The  system,  once  introduced,  soon  developed  itself  in 
strength  and  pretensions.  Cj'prian  in  his  time  contrib- 
uted greatly  to  establish  the  sacerdotal  position  and 
power  in  the  Church.     "  Vel  eligendi  Av^no^  sactrdotes, 

vel  indignos  recusaudi ut    sacerdos,  plebe  pre- 

sente,  sub  omnium  oculis  deligatur. " — Cj'p.  "  Ep."  G8. 

"  Utique  ille  sacerdos  vice  Christi  vere  fungitur."  Ep. 
68,  (id  Cdict'Iium. 


THE  CURI8TIAN  MINISTET.  149 

whom  the  Church  ministry  is  dii'ectly  asserted 
to  be  a  priesthood.  By  Cyprian  an  undis- 
guised sacerdotalism  is  maintained  ;  and  in  the 
fourth  centuiy  the  sacerdotal  system  took  deep 
root  in  the  Church,  and  grew  and  flourished, 
until  it  culminated  at  last  in  the  overbearing 
pretensions  of  the  priesthood  in  the  later 
Church  of  Rome.     ... 

In  order,  therefore,  to  a  right  appreciation 
of  the  true  nature  of  the  ministerial  oflices  in 
the  Christian  Church,  and  of  the  ministrations 
essentially  belonging  to  them,  it  is  necessary 
to  inquire  more  particularly  what  the  Apostles 
really  intended  their  Church  ofticers  to  be  and 
to  do,  and  what  they  purposely  and  altogether 
excluded  from  the  sphere  of  their  authority 
and  duties,  and  so  to  arrive  at  a  just  and  sober 
judgment  respecting  the  claims  and  assertions 
of  post-apostolic  times. 

And  herein,  with  a  view  to  bringing  the 
rpiesrion  in  as  distinct  and  clear  a  manner  as 
possi1)le  before  those  who  may  be  inclined  to 
give  it  a  careful  consideration,  I  will  at  once 
state  that  tlie  proposition  which  I  undertake 
to  prove  from  the  Xew  Testament,  and  from 
the  teaching  and  practice  of  tlie  A])ostles  there 
recorded,  is  that,  acordiug  to  Scripture  truth, 
the  C/irixtinn  )iii)i't,'<try  is  not  a  priesthood ^  and 


150  NATURE  OF 

Christian  ministers  are  not  priests,  are  not  in- 
vested with  any  sacerdotal  powers,  and  have 
no  sacerdotal  fnnctions  to  perform. 

The  English  word  "  priest"  is  indeed  only 
the  word  "  presbyter"  abbreviated  in  its  pass- 
age into  our  modern  language  ;  and  were  it 
not  for  the  equivocal  meaning  of  the  term, 
and  the  consequent  confusion  of  thought,  and 
the  excuse  for  erroneous  teaching,  which  it 
favors,  there  could  be  no  objection  to  our  thus 
using  it  to  designate  the  ti'uly  apostolic  office 
of  the  presbyter,  or  elder,  of  the  IS^ew  Testa- 
ment.*    But  I  here  use  the  words  priest  and 

*Tlie  word  "  presbyters"  became  "  prester  ;"  then  in 
Xorman  French  "  prestre  ;"  and  from  this  the  modern 
French  "  pretre,"  and  the  Englisli  "  prest,"  afterwards 
"  priest." 

Tlie  circumstance  tliat  this  word  is  used  to  denote  tlie 
Jewish  and  Pagan  sacriflcers,  as  well  as  Christian  minis- 
ters, indicates  that  the  nations  which  thus  use  it  were 
Christianized  after  sacerdotalism  had  gained  a  settled 
place  in  the  Church. 

The  word  "  priest,  "from  its  equivocal  meaning,  is  still 
employed  amongst  ourselves  to  prove  by  an  argument 
— weak,  indeed,  and  illogical,  yet  not  without  its  influ- 
ence on  weak  and  illogical  minds — that  the  Church  of 
England  retains  all  the  sacerdotalism  of  the  older  Church. 
Thus  the  Church  of  England  declares  certain  of  her 
ministers  to  be  "  priests  ;"  a  priest  must  offer  sacrifices 
(Heb.  8  :  3  ;  10  :  11),  and  must  have  an  altar  whereon  to 
offer  them  :  the  altar  in  our  churches  must  be  the  Com- 


THE  CHRIS2IAN  MINISTRY.  151 

priesthood  only  in  the  other  and  more  com- 
mon meaning,  as  the  equivalents  of  the  Greek 
lepev?  and  leparsia,  as  they  are  used  through- 
out our  English  Bible.  A  priest  in  this  ac- 
ceptation of  the  word  is  one  whose  office  it  is 
to  act  as  a  mediator,  or  medium  of  acceptable 
communication,  between  God  and  man  in 
sacred  things,  to  offer  acceptable  sacrifices  to 
God  for  the  people,  and  to  impart  to  them  by 
t]ie  power  of  his  official  acts  the  gi-ace  or  l)le8s- 
ing  which  God  is  ready  to  bestow,  especially 
the  al)solution  or  forgiveness  of  their  sins, 
when  tliey  have  confessed,  and  repented  of 
them.  And  in  this  sense  it  is  that  I  undertake 
to  prove  that  the  Christian  ministry  is  not  a 
priesthood. 

1.   Tlie   first    evidence  wliich  I  adduce  in 

munion  Table,  and  the  Lord's  Supper  the  sacritice  ;  and 
then  any  amount  of  sacerdotal  and  sacramental  super- 
stitions can  be  introduced  (td  lihihim,  in  direct  opposition 
to  our  Prayer-Book's  teaching.  It  is  most  desirable, 
therefore,  that  this  equivocal  word  should  be  avoided, 
and  the  honest,  original  "  presbyter"  be  restored  to  its 
place. 

It  is  much  to  be  lamented  that  good  and  learned  men, 
while  acknowledging  that  a  Christian  minister  is  not  a 
sacrificing  priest — a  lepeOf  or  sacerdos — but  an  Elder,  a 
TTpea^ivTEjioi  or  prexbifU'v — sliould  yet  have  countenanced 
the  continued  use  of  the  word  "  priest  ;"  thus  giving  a 
handle  to  those  who  well  know  how  to  use  it  for  evil. 


152  NATURE  OF 

proof  of  this  proposition  is  supplied  by  a  con- 
sideration of  the  source  from  whence  the 
form  and  shape  (so  to  speak)  of  the  Christian 
ministry  was  derived  ;  the  model  which  the 
Apostles  saw  fit  to  imitate  in  the  offices  which 
they  instituted  in  the  Church. 

As  the  Christian  rehgion  rose  up  out  of  the 
very  depth  and  essence  of  Judaism,  following 
it  as  its  foreordained  end  and  consummation, 
it  might  reasonably  be  expected  that  such 
forms  and  regulations  of  the  Jewish  Churcli 
as  were  not  inconsistent  ^^^th  the  principles  of 
the  Gospel  Dispensation  would  be  retained 
and  adapted  to  its  use.  And  the  Apostles 
being  men  deeply  imbued  with  Jewish  feel- 
ings, and  (it  may  even  be  said)  with  Jewish 
prejudices,  must  have  been  inclined  to  deviate 
no  further  from  the  customary  observances  of 
their  law  than  their  Divine  Instructor  taught 
them  to  be  absolutely  required.  And  they 
must  have  felt  that  it  was  wise  to  give  tlieir 
new  religious  life  and  worsliip  as  little  innova- 
tion and  strangeness  to  Jewish  minds  as  possi- 
ble, by  continuing  whatever  could  2onsistently 
be  continued  of  their  accustomed  ceremonial. 

But  when  we  proceed  to  trace  how  far  these 
anticipations  were  realized  in  the  apostolic 
ordering  'of  the  Christian  societies,   we  meet 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  .153 

with  a  peculiarity  in  the  Jews'  religion,  which 
must  be  clearly  apprehended  l)efore  the  reten- 
tion or  rejection  of  Jewish  ordinances  can  be 
riglitly  understood  ;  but  which,  when  clearly 
apprehended,  throws  great  light  not  only  on 
tlie  origin  of  the  Christian  ministry,  but  also 
on  all  the  powers  and  functions  which  were 
assigned  to  it  at  the  first,  or  which  it  could 
ever  afterwards  legitimately  claim. 

The  religious  life  of  the  Jews  in  its  outward 
practice  and  operation  at  the  commencement 
of  the  Christian  era,  and  for  at  least  several 
centuries  before  it,  exhil)ited  a  remarkable 
Dualisin — a  twofold  system — each  part  of 
M'hicli  was  quite  independent  of  the  otlier, 
though  their  operation  and  effects  were  har- 
moniously coml)ined.  These  two  parts  were 
resi)ectively  centred  in 

The   Tviiiple  and  The  Si/na<jO(jue. 

The  religious  system  of  the  Temple  was 
altogether  of  divine  a])pointinent,  and  all  its 
services  divinely  ordered,  even  in  their  nii- 
imte  details,  without  an  authority  l>eing  vested 
anywhere  on  earth  for  altering  any  of  the  reg- 
ulations originally  })resci-ibe(l. 

The  I'eliijjious  svstem  of  the  kSvnaaoi^ue 
was  of  man's  ap])ointment,  its  services  l)eing 


154  NATURE  OF 

ordered  by  no  divine  law,  bnt  originating  in 
the  wisdom  of  man,  and  by  man's  authority 
and  discretion  regulated  and  maintained. 

In  the  Temple  was  the  priest  consecrated 
according  to  a  precise  regulation,  and  a  sacer- 
dotal succession  laid  down  by  God  Himself, 
with  the  altar  and  its  sacrifices  at  which  he 
officiated,  the  incense  which  he  burned,  the 
holy  places  into  which  none  might  enter,  but 
those  to  whom  it  was  especially  assigned. 

In  the  Synagogue  was  the  reader  of  the 
Scriptures,  the  preacher  or  expounder  of  re- 
ligious and  moral  truth,  the  leader  of  the  com- 
mon devotions  of  the  people,  unconsecrated 
by  any  special  rites,  and  unrestricted  by  any 
rule  of  succession  ;  with  a  reading-desk  or 
pulpit  at  wliich  he  stood,  but  with  no  altar, 
sacrifices,  or  incense,  and  no  part  of  the  1)uild- 
ing  more  holy  than  the  rest. 

And  without  attempting  now  to  dwell  upon 
all  the  remarkable  contrasts  thus  displayed,  it 
may  sufiice  to  say  that  the  Temple  exhibited 
in  a  grand  combination  of  typical  places,  per- 
sons, and  actions,  God  dwelling  with  man,  rec- 
onciling the  world  unto  Himself  in  the  person 
and  work  of  Christ,  and  pardoning,  justify- 
ing, and  graciously  receiving  those  who  come 
to  Him  through  the  appointed  Saviour  ;  while 


TUE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  155 

the  Synagogue  exliibited  a  congregation  of 
men,  already  reconciled  to  God,  assembled 
as  devout  worshipj^ers  for  prayer  and  praise, 
for  instruction  in  dirine  knowledge,  and  edi- 
Hcation  in  rigliteons  living.  And  the  two 
systems — the  one  divine,  the  other  human  ; 
the  one  gorgeous  and  typical,  the  other  sim- 
ple and  real ;  in  the  one,  God  drawing  near 
to  man  ;  in  the  other,  man  drawing  near  to 
God — never  clashed  or  interfered  with  each 
other,  were  never  intermingled  or  confounded 
together,  "  In  the  Tem])le  there  was  no  pul- 
pit, in  the  Synagogue  there  was  no  altar." 

Xow  it  was  the  Temple  system  with  its  im- 
posing a^'sthetic  services,  its  associations  of  awe 
and  mystery,  and  not  the  simple  unexciting 
worship  of  the  Synagogue,  that  naturally  ap- 
pealed to  the  imagination  and  feelings  of  men. 
And  accordingly,  from  the  hegimiing  of  the 
third  cpntury  portions  of  this  system  ])eganand 
continued  increasingly  to  l)e  introduced  into  the 
Churcli  ;  and  in  particular  the  idea  of  the 
Temple  service  was  imported  into  the  worship 
of  Cliristian  congregations  ;  the  Christian  min- 
istry, as  already  mentioned,  was  re})resented  to 
be  a  Hierarchy  ;  the  form  and  arrangements 
of  the  ])uil(Hngs  for  ])ul)lic  devotions  were  as- 
siinilated   as   much   as  possible  to  tliose  <»f  the 


156  NATURE  OF 

Hebrew  sanctuary  ;  and  a  system  of  sacerdo- 
talism grew  up,  and  became  so  inveterate  in 
the  Clnircli,  <tliat  it  still  lingers  and  re^^ves 
even  amongst  ourselves,  puniied  indeed  from 
its  grosser  superstitions,  but  not  altogether  re- 
moved by  the  happy  influence  of  the  Refor- 
mation. 

Not  so,  however,  was  it  in  the  Ajjostles' 
days,  or  with  any  of  their  ordinances  and  in- 
stitutions. They  retained  and  adapted  to 
Christian  use  some  Jewish  forms  and  regula- 
tions ;  but  they  were  taken  altogether,  not 
from  the  Temple,  but  from  the  Synagogue. 
The  offices  which  they  apj^ointed  in  the 
Church,  and  the  duties  and  authority  which 
they  attached  to  them,  together  with  the  regu- 
lations which  they  made  for  Christian  worship, 
bore  no  resemblance  in  name  or  in  nature  to 
the  services  of  the  priesthood  in  the  Temple. 
The  Apostles  had  been  divinely  taught  that 
those  priests  and  services  were  typical  forms 
and  shadows,  which  were  all  centred  and  ful- 
filled and  done  away  in  Christ  :  and  to  rein- 
state them  in  the  Christian  Church  would 
have  been  in  their  judgment  to  go  back  to 
the  bondao'e  of  "  weak  and  beo:o;arlv  ele- 
ments"  from  the  liberty,  strength,  and  rich 
completeness    of    the    Gospel    Dispensation. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  157 

They  saw  that  as  the  ordinances  of  tlie  Temple 
represented  the  work  of  God  wrought  out  for 
man,  not  man's  work  for  God,  to  continue 
them,  after  that  work  was  finislied  in  tlie  life 
and  death  of  Jesus,  would  be  in  eifect  so  far 
to  deny  the  efficacy  of  the  Saviour's  mission, 
and  to  thrust  in  the  miserable  performances 
of  men  to  fill  up  an  imagined  imperfection  in 
the  Son  of  God. 

The  Apostles  therefore  took  nothing  from 
the  Temple  system  for  the  machinery  of  their 
Church  government  ;  but  the  offices  wliicli 
they  appointed,  and  the  duties  and  authority 
which  they  attaclied  to  them,  together  witli  the 
regulations  which  they  made  for  Christian 
worship,  corresponded  in  a  remarkal)le  and 
unmistakal)le  manner  M-ith  the  wliule  system 
of  the  Jewish  svnao'omie. 

It  would  be  too  long  to  cinimerate  here  all 
the  particulars  of  this  similarity.  Tliey  may 
be  found  at  length,  witli  the  wliole  subject 
exhaustively  discussed  in  a  spirit  of  great 
fairness  in  Yitriiiga's  treatise  "  On  the  Syna- 
gogue.''*    It  will  be  sufficient  for  our  present 

*  Tlie  agreement  of  tlie  Christian  Church  with  the 
SynagOLnu",  ami  its  disagreement  with  the  Temple  sys- 
tem, are  specially'  seen  in  the  following  particulars  : 

1.  The  nariu')<  of  the  offirc-beiircru  in  the  Church,  before 


158  NATURE  OF 

purpose  to  observe  that  a  Jewish  synagogue 
was  governed  by  a  body  of  elders,  some  of 
whom  acted  especially  as  rulers  or  judges, 
others  were  the  public  religious  ministers,  and 
led  the  prayers  of  the  people,  and  took  care  of 
the  reading  of  the  law  ;  and  such  an  officer  was 
called  the  angel  of  the  Church,  and  the  ehazan 
or  bishop  of  the  congregation.  There  were 
also  deacons  or  almoners,  on  whom  the  care 
of  the  poor  devolved.  And  these  offices  with 
their  ministrations  the  Apostles  transferred  to 

the  third  century,  were  those  of  the  Synagogue,  not  of 
the  Temple. 

2.  T\\e 'places  of  too raltip — only  one  Temj^le,  but  Syna- 
gogues anywhere  ;  so  Cliurches. 

'i.  'So  different  degrees  of  sancdiy  in  the  Sj'nagogues — 
or  in  the  Churches. 

4.  The  services  in  the  Synagogue,  Init  not  in  the  Tem- 
ple, corresponded  with  those  of  Christians. 

5.  Vestments  were  necessary  for  priests  in  tlie  Temple  ; 
but  no  particular  dress  was  used  in  the  Synagogue,  nor 
in  Christian  Churches. 

0.  Is  0  restriction  ofjyersons  to  a  particular  tribe  or  class 
in  the  Synagogue,  but  any  fit  person  might  be  ap- 
pointed to  minister  there  ;  so  also  in  Christian  Churches. 

7.  'No  fired  rule  about  the  aye  of  those  Avho  officiated 
in  the  Synagogue  ;  nor  in  the  Christian  Churches. 

8.  Xo  exclusion  on  the  ground  of  bodily  defects  in  the 
Synagogue  ;  or  in  the  Christian  Church. 

9.  The  Synagogue  had  a  raised  desk  or  pulpit  for  the 
reader,  but  no  altar  ;  so  Churches  had  only  an  Ambo  or 
pulpiturn  of  the  same  kind. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  159 

the  Christian  Churches.  Nor  is  it  an  nnrea- 
sonable  supposition  that  "  wlienever  a  Jewish 
synagogue  existed  which  was  brought,  the 
whole  or  the  chief  part  of  it,  to  embrace  the 
Gospel,  the  Apostles  did  not  there  so  much 
form  a  Christian  Church  (or  congregation, 
€KHXtj()ia),  as  7nal'e  an  existing  congregation 
Christian,  by  introducing  the  Christian  sacra- 
ments and  worship,  and  estal)lisliing  whatever 
regulations  were  requisite  for  the  newly  adopt- 
ed faith  ;  leaving  the  machinery  (if  I  may  so 
speak)  of  government  unchanged,  the  rulers 
of  synagogues,  elders,  and  other  officers 
(whether  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical,  or  both) 
being  already  provided  in  the  existing  institu- 
tion.'"' That  such  was  sometimes  the  case  in 
Jerusalem  and  other  Jewish  towns  is  liighly 
probable  ;  and  this  j>ossil)ly  is  the  reason  why 
St.  James  calls  the  ])lace  where  Christians  met 
for  public  worship,  or  the  congregation  itself, 
tlieir  Synagogue,  as  he  does  in  his  epistle 
addressed  especially  to  Hebrew  disciples. 

The  Apostles,  therefore,  having  adopted 
the  official  arrany-ements  of  the  Svnaii^oi'-ue, 
and  discarded  those  of  the  Tem])le,  in  the  in- 
stitution of  Church  offices,  plainly  showed  by 
this  circumstance  that  no  ]UMestly  ])owers  or 
duties  were  attached  to  their  ministrations. 


160  NATTIBK  OF 

2.  Another  argument  which  lands  us  in  tlie 
same  conchision  is  deduced  from  the  condition 
of  the  lay  members  of  the  Church  as  it  ap- 
pears in  the  Xew  Testament,  and  the  equality 
of  privilege  or  standing-ground  in  Christ 
which  Christians  of  all  orders  or  degrees  pos- 
sessed. The  way  of  access  to  God  being  open 
to  all  without  distinction  througli  the  priest- 
hood of  Christ,  there  was  nothing  for  a  priest 
to  do — no  sacerdotal  work  or  office  for  him  to 
undertake.  But  the  substance  of  this  argu- 
ment, ])eing  specially  connected  with  the  posi- 
tion of  the  Christian  laity,  will  be  more  fully 
considered  in  the  following  Lecture. 

3.  A  third  distinct  proof  that  the  office- 
bearers in  the  Church  of  the  Apostles  were 
not,  and  could  not  l)e,  priests,  or  perform  any 
sacerdotal  duties,  is  seen  in  a  condensed  form 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  is  found  at 
large  in  the  whole  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, of  which  that  epistle,  as  far  as  its  sul^- 
ject  reaches,  is  so  valuable  an  epitome.  AVe 
there  learn  that  from  the  very  nature  of  tlie 
priestly  office  it  is  necessary  for  those  wlio 
hold  it  to  be  specially  called  and  appointed  by 
God,  eitlier  personally  l)y  name,  or  according 
to  a  divinely  instituted  order  of  succession  ; 
and  that,   since  the  patriarchal    dispensation, 


THE  CHBISTIAN  MINISTRY.  161 

only  two  orders  of  priesthood  have  ever  had 
this  necessary  divine  sanction  granted  to 
them.  These  two  orders  are  the  Order  of 
Aaron  and  the  Order  of  Melchizedec.  The 
priests  of  the  former  Order  belonged  to  the 
Jewish  dispensation  only,  and  have  indisput- 
ably passed  away.  The  only  priest  after  the 
Order  of  Melchizedec,  ever  mentioned  in  the 
Bible,  is  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ — the  "  Priest 
upon  His  throne,"  without  a  successor,  as  He 
had  none  before  Him,  in  the  everlasting  priest- 
hood of  His  mediatorial  reign.  This  argu- 
ment appears  to  me  to  be  conclusive.  It  ap- 
pears to  me  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
shuts  out  the  possibility  of  there  l)eing  any 
other  priest  in  the  Christian  Church  besides 
Christ  Himself.  But  this  does  not  so  ajjpear 
to  a  large  number  of  our  clergy.  Bishops,  as 
far  back  as  the  third  century,  claimed  to  be 
successors  or  vicegerents  of  Christ  on  earth  ;* 

*  In  the  estimation  of  Cyprian,  in  tlie  middle  of  the 
third  century,  the  Bishop  was  the  absohite  vicegerent  of 
Christ  upon  eartli  in  spiritual  things. 

"  Xam  si  .Jesus  Christus  Domiiuis  et  Deus  noster  ipse 
est  summus  sacerdos  Dei  patris,  et  sacrificium  patri 
se  ipsum  primus  obtiilit,  et  hoc  fieri  in  sui  conunemora- 
tioneni  prtecipit,  uticpie  ille  sacerdos  vic^  Christi  vere 
fungitur. " — "  Cyp.  Ep."  (53,  ad  Ccciliinn. 

And  again,  "  Ne(iue  enini  aliunde  lipereses  obortrp 
11 


162  NATURE  OF 

and  our  presbyters  now  do  not  hesitate  to  de- 
clare that  they  are  Ih'iests  after  the  Order  of 
MelGhizedec.  To  my  mind  and  feeling  this  is 
an  impious  claim  ;  but  countenanced  as  they 
are  by  numberless  past  and  present  examples, 
good  men  are  not  conscious  of  imj^iety  in  mak- 
ing it.  But  then  it  is  necessary  to  ask  these 
"  priests"  for  their  credentials.  Where  is 
the  record  of  their  divine  appointment  to  the 
sacerdotal  office  ?  In  what  j^art  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  in  what  form  of  words,  is  the 
institution  of  such  priests,  and  the  manner  of 

sunt,  aiit  nata  sunt  scliismata,  quam  inde  quod  sacerdoti 
Dei  non  obtemperatur  ;  nee  unus  in  ecclesia  ad  tempus 
sacerdos  et  ad  tempus  judex  vice  Christi  cogitatur. " — 
"  Cyp.  Ep. "  65,  ad  Carnelmm. 

Tliese  pretensions  were  not  diminished  in  the  fourth 
century,  for  which  the  testimony  of  Ambrose  will  be 
sufficient.  He  declares  that  a  Bishop  j^rforms  the  part 
of  Christ  in  the  Church,  and  is  the  vicegerent  of  the  Lord. 

"  In  ecclesia  i^ropter  reverentiam  Episcopalem  non 
habeat  caput  liberum,  sed  velamine  tectum  ;  nee  habeat 
potestatem  loquendi  ;  quia  Episcopvs  personam  habet 
Christi.  Qviasi  ergo  ante  judicem,  sic  ante  Episcopum, 
quia  vicarius  Domini  est,  propter  reatus  originem  sub- 
jecta  debet  videri." — "  Ambros.  Com."  in  1  Cor.  11  :  10. 

The  interpolator  of  the  Ignatian  epistles,  whatever  was 
his  date,  "  had  used  almost  the  highest  possible  language 
about  Episcopacy  ;"  but  from  Cyprian's  time  and  on- 
wards the  addition  of  sacerdotalism  raised  it  to  a  higher 
level. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  163 

their  succession,  to  be  found  ?  And  to  such 
inquiries  no  satisfactory  answer  has  been  or 
can  be  given. 

But  there  is  still  another  way  in  which  the 
priestly  claims  of  the  Christian  ministry  are 
presented,  and  which  is  thought  to  be  less 
arrogant  in  its  pretensions  than  the  one  just 
noticed.  Christian  priests,  it  is  urged,  are 
representatives  of  the  whole  Christian  body  ; 
even  as  under  the  Jewish  law  the  priestly  tribe 
held  their  position  as  representatives  of  the 
whole  people,  who  were  "  a  kingdom  of  priests 
— a  holy  nation."  And  since  in  a  secondary 
and  spiritual  sense  all  those  who  are  in  Christ 
are  "  kings  and  priests  unto  God  " — "  a  holy 
nation,  a  royal  priesthood," — the  clergy  as  a 
representative  order,  and  delegates  from  the 
whole  Christian  community,  have  a  priestly 
office  in  the  Church. 

But  if  this  were  so,  then  the  Cliristiaii  min- 
ister, as  such  a  representative  priest,  could  at 
any  rate  oidy  exercise  tlie  powers  of  the  body 
which  he  represented  ;  lie  could  therefore 
offer  only  spiritual  sacrifices,  without  any 
material  altar  or  material  sacrifice  to  put  upon 
it, — only  such  sacrifices  as  that  of  praise  and 
thanksgiving,  which  every  individual  Christiiin 
is   to  give  ;  and    for  this   ]>iirp(isc   a   se])arate 


164  NATURE  OF 

order  of  priests  is  useless.  *  Besides  this,  the 
idea  of  the  spiritual  priesthood  of  each  indi- 
vidual Christian  being  delegated  to  the  clencal 
order  is  only  a  fond  imagination,  put  forward 
to  support  a  favorite  claim.  There  is  no 
ground  for  supposing  that  the  priestly  func- 
tions and  privileges  of  the  Christian  people 
ever  were  or  can  be  thus  transferred  or  dele- 
gated. Although  the  Jewish  people  were  a 
nation  of  priests,  it  was  only  by  a  divine  com- 
mand expressly  and  distinctly  given  that  one 
tribe  was  selected  to  minister  for  the  nation  in 

*  "  The  sacrifice  of  praise"  is  a  Scriptural  expression, 
and  our  Communion  |Service  speaks  of  "  this  our  sacri- 
fice of  praise  and  thanksgiving."  Such  spiritual  sacri- 
fices are  offered  up  by  all  and  each  of  the  faithful  from 
the  altar  of  the  heart ;  and  there  is  no  place  for  any 
other  priest,  besides  the  worshippers  themselves,  in  such 
a  sacrifice.  This  is  the  old  Christian  view  before  sacer- 
dotalism infected  the  Church.  Justin  Mart^'r  (a.d.  155) 
says  that  prayers  and  thanksgivings  are  the  ordy  accept- 
able sacrifices,  and  that  they  are  offered  by  Christians 
(not  by  a  priest  or  minister)  in  the  memorial  of  the 
bread  and  wine,  in  which  they  remember  what  Christ 
suffered  for  them.  ^Ort  fjiv  ovv  koX  eixal  koI  evxupia-iai, 
virb  Tuv  u^iuv  yevofiEvai,  Te/.Eiai  /lovac  koI  evapeaToi  e'tai  tu 
9cu  dvaioL,  Kal  «i'r6f  '^r}/ii,  ravra  yap  fxovu  Kal  Xpinriavol 
napf:2,a/3ov  ■koleIv,  kui  irr'  uvafivijaec  St  ri/g  Tpo<p7]S  avrCtv 
^rjpdi  TE  Kai  vypui,  iv  y,  kol  tov  TzaOovS,  b  tzettovOe  6i  airovS 
6  vldi  TOV  Qeov,  fiEjivTivTaL. — "Justin  M.  Dial.  c.  Tryph." 
§  117. 


IHE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRT.  165 

€acred  tilings,  and  one  family  out  of  this  tribe 
was  appointed  for  the  priesthood.  No  such 
divine  selection  or  appointment  for  a  priest- 
hood in  the  Christian  Church  is  anywhere  to 
te  found  ;  and  the  want  of  this,  plead  what 
we  will,  is  absolutely  destructive  to  all  priestly 
<jlaims. 

4.  And  this  brings  us  to  a  fourth  and  con- 
clusive proof  of  my  proposition,  to  be  found 
among  the  remarkable  omissions  of  Holy 
Writ.  In  nothing  is  the  speaking  silence  of 
the  Xew  Testament  more  complete  and  sig- 
nificant than  in  the  fact  that  never  they^e  are 
Christian  minister  of  any  degree  called  priests. 
Neither  the  Apostles  themselves,  nor  any 
•office-bearers  whom  they  appointed,  are  ever 
«poken  of  as  having  sacerdotal  powers,  or  sac- 
erdotal duties,  omitted  to  them.  In  no  single 
instance  is  any  one  of  tlxe  words,  which  de- 
scril)e  the  priesthood  and  its  work,  assigned  to 
the  office  of  the  Christian  ministry  or  to  its 
ministrations.*    Familiar  as  the  Apostles  were 

*  Such  words  as  Upet'C,  lepareia,  lepdrevfia,  lepovpylu, 
f)vu,  Ovdla,  OvaiaaTTipiov,  or  any  others  of  sacerdotal 
meaninff,  are  never  so  much  as  once  in  the  Xew  Testa- 
ment spoken  of  the  ministerial  services  iujhe  Christian 
Church. 

They  are  used  when  speaking  of  the  priestliood  of 
Jesus  Christ  :  and  the  following  obviously  figumtite  ex- 


166  NATURE  OF 

with  the  striking  ceremonial  of  the  Temple 
worehip,  and  sometimes  deri\ang  from  it  a. 
figurative  language  of  the  greatest  force,  they 
never  employ  terms  of  priestly  import  in  any 
manner  which  countenances  the  supposition 
that  they,  or  the  presbyters  of  their  Churches, 
were  acting  as  Priests  in  the  congregations  of 
Christian  people. 

pressions  are  found  applied  to  Christians  in  general, — 
not  Christian  ministers.     Thus — 

Bvaiu,  a  sacrifice.  ' '  Present  ^your  bodies  a  living  sac- 
rifice."— 'ivalav  ^(^aav.     (Rom.  12  :'l.) 

The  contribution  sent  by  the  Philippians  to  St.  Paul  is- 
called  "  a  sacrifice  (Ovaiav)  acceptable,  well-pleasing  to 
God."    (Phil.  4:18.) 

' '  The  sacrifice  {fjvaiav)  of  praise  : ' '  and  "to  do  good 
and  to  distribute  forget  not,  for  with  such  sacrifices 
{fivaiaii)  God  is  well  pleased."     (Heb.  13  :  15,  16.) 

"  To  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices"  dvaiaq  nvevfinTiKdi, 
(1  Pet.  2:5.) 

'lepei'S  and^lepurevfia  priest  and  priestJiood, — said  of  all 
Christians,  j  "  Ye  are  a  hoi}'' priesthood  " — lepdrevfia : — 
and  "  a  royal  priesthood  "  lepdrev/ia.     (1  Pet.  2  :  5,  9.) 

"  Hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  (lepE'is)  unto  God."" 
(Rev.  1  :  6.)  'And  also  in  Rev.  5  :  10  ;  20  :  6. 

St.  Paul,  on  one  occasion,  in  a  very  grand  figure  of 
speech,  represents  the  whole  body  of  Gentile  Christians 
as  a  great  saaifice  offered  up  to  God,  and  himself  as  a 
priest  ministering  at  it  ;  thus,  "  That  I  should  be  the 
minister  {Itirovpydv,  not  a  sacerdotal  word)  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Gentiles,  ministering  the  Gospel  of  God" 
{'lepovpyovvra  rd  Evayye/.ibv — acting  as  a   priest  with  re- 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY.  167 

This  omission  is  acknowledged  by  High 
Clmrchmen  to  be  a  "  difficulty  ;"  but  it  is 
far  more  than  a  difficulty  :  it  is  an  insuperable 
har  to  all  sacerdotal  assumptions.  For  when 
it  is  considered  that  before  the  Apostles'  times 
neither  they  nor  any  one  else  had  even  so 
much  as  ever  heard  of  a  religion  without  a 
visible  priesthood  and  its  necessary  accom- 
paniments, and  that  after  the  Apostles  were 
gone  the  Church  turned  back  to  this  conspicu- 
ous element  of  all  other  religions  ;  when  it  is 
considered  also  that  a  priesthood  requires  not 
merely  a  non -prohibition,  but  a  2>ositive  and 
express  appointment  of  divine  authority,  I  am 
justified  in  affirming  that  this  negative  argu- 
ment from  the  omissions  of  the  Xew  Testa- 
ment proves  as  strongly  as  any  historic  evi- 
dence can  demonstrate,  that  in  the  Cliristian- 

spect  to  the  Gospel)  "  that  the  offering  up  of  the  Gen- 
tiles" {npoa^opa  tC)v  i^Jvuv)  "might  be  acceptable." 
Rom.  15  :  16. 

He  also  uses  a  similar  metaphor  in  writing  to  the 
Philippians,  "  And  if  I  be  off'ered  {aniviofiaL,  am  poured 
out  as  a  libation  or  drink  offering)  upon  tlie  sacrifice 
(bvaia)  and  service  of  your  faith."     (Phil.  2  :  17.) 

And  he  uses  tlie  word  a-nevdofiai  in  the  same  sense  in 
2  Tim.  4  :  6,  "  I  am  ready  to  be  offered  "  fid-q  a-ivdouai. 

These  are  all  the  instances  in  which  words  occur  in 
connection  with  Christians,  except  in  Ileb.  13  :  10,  for 
which  see  Introductory  Essay. 


168  THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY. 

ity  which  the  Apostles  preached  and  taught 
there  was  no  priesthood  or  priestly  ministra- 
tions, but  those  of  Jesus  Christ  Himself — the 
one  great  and  sufficient  High-priest  of  the 
whole  Church  of  God.     .     .     . 

And  these  four  proofs,  each  one  by  itself 
complete,  must  be  taken  together  in  their  ac- 
cumulative force,  in  considering  the  question 
whether  the  Christian  ministry  is  a  priesthood 
or  not. 

But  this  is  not  all.  There  is  other  collat- 
eral or  secondary  evidence  by  no  means  void 
of  weight,  though  not  bearing  so  directly  on 
the  subject  as  the  preceding  testimony.  Thus 
it  is  a  significant  fact  that  neither  presbyters 
nor  deacons  were  anointed,  like  the  Jewish 
priests,  to  consecrate  them  for  their  ministerial 
work  ;  but  they  were  admitted  to  their  sacred 
offices  by  a  solemn  but  simple  form  of  ordi- 
nation.— "Ecclesiastical  Polity  of  the  Xew 
Testament,"  pp.  ST-109. 


APPENDIX 


AS"   ESSAY, 

BY  THE 

Rt.   Rev.   ALFRED    LEE,    D.D., 

BISHOP  OF  THE   DIOCESE  OF   DELAWARE.* 


"THE    PROPER    FUNCTION    OF     THE     CHRISTIAN 

MINISTRY." 

Before  the  coming  of  oiir  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  tliere  existed  in  the  Jewisli  Church  an 
order  of  men  set  apart  for  the  public  service 
of  God.  The  duties  of  this  class  were  very 
particularly  s])ecified  in  the  Mosaic  Ceremo- 
nial Law.  They  served  in  the  variou  offices  of 
the  tabernacle  and  temple  worship,  and  espe- 
cially officiated  in  the  offering  of  sacrifices. 
This  was  pre-eminently  their  function,  and  all 
that  pertained  thereto  was  exactly  and  minute- 
ly set  forth.  If  they  took  any  part  in  })u1)- 
lic    religious  instruction   it  was   of  secondary 

*  Delivered  in  the  C'liurcli  of  the  P'pipliiinv,  Philadel- 
phia,  Oct.,  187G. 


170  APPENDIX. 

importance,  and  very  little  is  said  about  it,* 
The  office  was  hereditary.  The  qualifications 
mainly  required  are  not  of  a  moral  and  sj)irit- 
ual  nature,  but  freedom  from  bodily  imper- 
fection, and  well-attested  family  descent. 

The  religious  instruction  of  the  people  was 
intrusted  in  the  first  instance  to  each  head  of 
a  family.  Children  were  to  be  trained  by 
their  parents  in  the  nurture  of  the  Lord  ;  and 
an  order  of  men  known  as  prophets  were 
raised  up  from  time  to  time,  and  specially 
commissioned  to  instruct  and  admonish  the 
people.  Sometimes,  not  often,  the  prophet 
was  taken  from  among  the  priests. 

Was  a  like  priestly  order  to  be  perpetuated 
under  the  gospel  dispensation,  and  the  Jewish 
to  be  succeeded  by  a  Christian  priesthood  ? 
This  opinion  gained  early  favor  in  the  Church, 
and  as  the  trath  of  Christ  was  dinnned  and 
corrupted  by  pagan  admixtures  and  worldly 
influences,  rapidly  strengthened  and  devel- 
oped. Rome  makes  the  priestly  hierarchy  a 
fundamental  doctrine,  and  her  whole  system 
is  pervaded  and  controlled  by  this  dogma.  By 
the  reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century  it  was 
maintained  that  the  sacrificial  system  of  the 
Old  Testament  was    simply  typical,    a   fore- 

*  Such  passages  as  Lev.  10  :  10,  11  ;  Dent.  33  :  10, 
seem  applicable  rather  to  informing  .the  people  respect- 
ing points  of  ritual  and  sacritice  than  moral  duties. 
"  That  you  may,  by  your  example  in  3'our  ministrations, 
preserve  the  minds  of  the  Israelites  from  confusion  in 
regard  to  the  distinctions  made  by  the  divine  Law." 
Speaker's  Commentary  on  Lev.  10  :  11.) 


APPENDIX.  171 

shadowing  of  the  realities  of  Redemption  ; 
that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  as  He  is 
the  great  High  Priest,  so  He  is  in  tnith  the 
only  priest  under  the  Gospel.  By  His  one 
oblation  of  Himself,  once  offered,  He  hath 
perfected  forever  them  that  are  sanctified, 
and  there  remaineth  no  more  offering  for  sins. 
In  a  figurative  sense,  every  Christian  is  a 
priest,  as  well  as  a  living  sacrifice,  but  there  is 
no  order,  distinct  from  the  rest  of  the  congre- 
gation, set  apart  for  this  function,  like  the 
Aaronic  priesthood.  The  Lord  Jesus  did 
institute  and  ordain  a  ministry,  who  were  to 
continue  until  the  end  of  the  world.  Their 
duties  are  clearly  defined.  First  of  all,  they 
are  to  announce  to  men  everywhere  the  amaz- 
ing and  glorious  fact  that  the  living  "  God 
hatli  sent  His  Son  into  the  world,  not  to  con- 
demn the  world,  but  that  the  world  through 
Him  might  be  saved."  Li  connection  with 
this  great  truth  they  are  to  set  forth  the  out- 
growing doctrines  of  which  this  is  the  root 
and  stem.  Tliey  are  to  gather  l)elievers  into 
a  visible  fold,  and  to  watch  over  their  faith 
and  conduct,  teaching  them  what  manner  of 
])ersons  they  ought  to  be  in  all  holy  conversa- 
tion and  godliness.  So  far  as  the  features  of 
the  old  dispensation  arc  preserved,  they  rei)re- 
sent  the  prophetical  rather  than  the  sacerdotal 
order. 

I  will  not  occupy  you  at  this  time  by  going 
into  the  scriptural  arguments  which  so  fully 
establish  this  })osition.     The  (piestion  has  never 


172  APPENDIX. 

been  answered^  I  am  bold  to  say  never  will 
be,  never  can  be  answered,  why,  if  the 
Christian  ministry  be  a  priesthood,  it  is  never 
so  entitled  in  the  l^ew  Testament.  The  name 
itself  is  of  frequent  occurrence,  and  the  abso- 
lute, unvarying  denial  of  this  name  to  the  gos- 
pel ministry  must  have  been  designed  and  in- 
tentional. Various  appellations  are  employed 
to  designate  those  invested  with  it  ;  never  that 
of  priest.  Much  is  said  about  the  duties  de- 
volved upon  them  ;  no  mention  of  sacrifice. 
They  are  represented  as  bearers  of  God's  mes- 
sage to  the  people,  not  as  mediators  through 
whom  the  people  approach  God.  The  vast 
structure  of  spiritual  despotism,  built  up  by 
Home  upon  the  fiction  of  a  human  priesthood 
still  existing,  is  as  devoid  of  real  foundation  as 
the  baseless  fabric  of  a  vision.  You  search 
for  it  in  the  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
and  His  aj^ostles,  and  it  is  not  there.  Just  as 
little  is  it  to  be  found  in  the  standards  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  inherited  from 
the  Reformation  era.  The  attempt  to  take 
advantage  of  the  ambiguity  of  the  word  priest, 
a  contracted  form  of  presbyter,  is  a  piece  of 
dishonest  sophistry  unworthy  of  the  name  of 
argument. 

Without  pursuing  further  the  scriptural  evi- 
dence upon  this  subject,  I  call  your  attention 
for  a  few  moments  to  the  effect  of  these  oppo- 
site views  upon  the  men  themselves  -who  sus- 
tain the  office  of  Christian  ministers,  and  to  the 
estimation  in  which  they  are  likely  to  be  held. 


APPENDIX.  173 

If  I  mistake  not,  there  are  some  considerations 
of  this  kind  of  no  small  importance. 

What  is  the  natural  effect  npon  the  men 
themselves  ? 

I  claim  that  the  view  which  contemplates 
the  Christian  minister  as  an  ambassador  for 
Christ,  a  herald  of  Ilis  salvation,  a  preacher  of 
the  faith,  an  expositor  of  the  Word  of  God,  a 
pastor  and  watchman  of  the  Hock,  tends  to 
develop  the  man  mentally,  morally,  and  spirit- 
ually, to  call  out  all  his  powers  and  energies, 
to  promote  his  growth  in  knowledge  and 
grace.  The  duties  of  such  an  office  call  for 
diligent  study,  especially  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  for  mental  discipline  and  reflection  ; 
for  study  of  men,  that  he  may  adapt  the  truth 
to  varying  characters  and  situations  ;  for 
study  of  the  age,  its  special  needs  and  dan- 
gers ;  for  lively  sympathy  with  tlie  wants, 
weaknesses,  snares,  and  trials  of  humanity;  for 
conscientious  fidelity,  proof  alike  against 
frowns  and  seductions.  If  you  sum  up  all  the 
(pialifications  conducive  to  legitnnate  intiu- 
ence,  effectiveness,  and  success  in  the  minis- 
ter, you  describe  the  noblest  type  of  numhood. 
Wlien  you  ordain  a  person  to  this  work,  you 
summon  him  to  aim  at  a  lofty  mark,  and 
prove  himself  fit  for  tin's  high  calling.  And 
to  approacli  in  any  good  degree  the  ideal,  he 
must  stir  up  the  gift  that  is  in  him,  whether 
by  native  endowment  or  by  divine  grace. 
While  ready  to  exclaim  from  the  de})t]i  oi  the 
heart,  "  Who  is  sufficient  for"t]iese  things  ::'" 


174  APPENDIX. 

and  putting  his  whole  rehance  upon  help  from 
above,  he  knows  that  this  help  and  blessing 
can  onlj  be  expected  in  the  diligent  and  faith- 
ful discharge  of  his  appointed  duties.  God 
does  not  bless  ignorance,  indolence,  negli- 
gence, iml)ecility.  He  requires  for  this  ser- 
vice men  apt  to  teach,  thoroughly  furnished, 
workmen  that  need  not  to  be  ashamed,  rightly 
dividing  the  woj'd  of  truth.  While  He  may 
make  use  of  huml)le  instruments,  that  no  flesh 
may  glory  in  His  presence,  yet  His  ministry  is 
a  rational  service.  Ko where  is  the  impression 
countenanced  that  it  is  a  mattei"  of  little 
moment  what  sort  of  men  are  ordained,  or 
with  what  attainments  and  in  what  spirit  they 
engage  in  their  woi"k.  Nowhere  is  the  im- 
pression countenanced  that  stupidity  and  sloth 
will  be  acceptable,  or  tliat  equal  blessings  will 
descend  upon  the  worker  and  the  idler,  the 
zealous  and  the  indifferent. 

And  intimately  connected  with  intellectual 
improvement,  in  one  who  feels  himself  moved 
to  this  work  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  is  the  cultiva- 
tion of  devout  affections,  the  keeping  of  tlie 
heart  witli  all  diligence,  close  and  trustful  com- 
munion witli  the  unseen  Saviour,  personal  abid- 
ing in  Christ  through  faith  and  love.  Under 
this  aspect  of  his  calling  the  minister  is  to  im- 
press by  his  life  as  well  as  by  his  doctrine. 
Character  is  one  grand  element  of  usefulness. 
He  is  to  be  a  burning  and  shining  liglit,  a  liv- 
ing epistle  of  Christ,  a  pattern  of  good  works. 
And  this  he  cannot  be  unless  the  life  of  God 


APPENDIX.  175 

in  his  own  soul  is  a  blessed  reality.  Out  of 
the  abundance  of  his  own  heart  his  mouth 
must  speak,  if  he  speak  to  the  hearts  and  con- 
sciences of  his  fellow-men.  And  M'liile  the 
help  is  pledged  of  Ilim  without  whom  nothing 
is  strong,  nothing  is  holy,  yet  upon  the  ser- 
vant is  devolved  the  responsibility  of  trading 
with  the  talent  and  stirring  up  the  gift.  lie 
ust  take  heed  to  himself  and  to  the  doctrine, 
if  he  would  save  himself  and  those  who  hear 
him.  Thus  the  mightiest  motives  press  upon 
the  man  who  receives  the  office  with  this 
understanding,  and  if  he  be  a  tnie,  sincere 
man,  will  tell  with  power  and  lead  to  the  con- 
secration of  soul,  body,  and  spirit  to  his  sacred 
duties. 

What  is  the  tendency  of  the  opposite  view  ? 
The  minister  regards  himself  as  a  priest,  like 
those  of  the  Aaronic  family.  His  granrl 
function  is  the  offering  of  sacrihce  :  as  he  is 
fond  of  representing  it,  the  tremendous,  un- 
bloody sacritice  of  the  cruciiied  Christ.  By 
his  words  and  acts,  as  the  liomiish  priest 
believes,  l)read  and  wine  in  the  Eucluirist  I)e- 
come  the  body,  soul,  and  divinity  (^f  the  Land) 
of  God.  According  to  tlie  theory  of  his  Angli- 
can copiers,  while  not  transubstantiated,  they 
end)ody  and  comprehend  in  an  unintelligihle, 
mysterious  manner  tlie  present  Christ.  In 
them  Christ  is  entitled  to  adoraticjn.  The 
ocmmunicants,  receiving  from  the  priest  the 
consecrated  elements,  are,  rpsoftido,  j)artakers 
of  the  l>odv  and   l)lood  of  Christ.      ( )ther  kin- 


176  APPENDIX. 

dred  and  subordinate  functions  are  claimed  and 
assumed,  j^ow,  however  vast  and  wonderful 
these  powers  and  functions,  yet  the  efficacy 
and  virtue  of  the  priest's  acts  are  not  at  all 
dependent  upon  his  moral  and  spiritual  char- 
acter. The  sacrifice  is  equally  perfect  and  avail- 
ing whether  the  officiator  be  an  ignorant  man  or 
a  learned,  a  devout  man  or  a  graceless,  a  saint  or 
a  libertine.  Tnie,  he  hears  exhortations  to  a 
holy  life,  as  befitting  his  calling,  but  his  man- 
ner of  life  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  miracles 
of  which  lie  is  the  pretended  instrument.  For 
the  accomplishment  of  this  prodigious  result 
he  needs  not  scholarship,  ^\^sdom,  spiritual 
discernment,  zeal,  love,  tenderness,  a  clean 
heart,  and  a  right  spirit.  All  that  he  needs  is 
punctilious  and  minute  adherence  to  his  direc- 
tory. He  must  attend  carefully  to  gesture  and 
posture.  He  must  kneel,  genuflect,  l>ow, 
cross  himself,  elevate  the  elements  precisely  at 
the  right  time  and  place.  His  soul  is  to  be 
absorbed,  not  with  the  presence  of  God,  the 
love  of  Christ,  the  great  oblation  offered  upon 
the  cross  once  for  all,  but  Avith  a  minute  and 
complicated  ceremonial.  The  feeding  of  his 
flock  is  not  with  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  pre- 
sented to  their  hearts  and  understandings,  but 
with  the  sacramental  elements  put  into  their 
mouths.  The  required  preparation  for  holy 
duties  is  not  study,  meditation,  and  prayer, 
but  the  rehearsal  of  certain  performances, 
many  of  tliem  trivial  and  minute. 

"Where  the  two  ideas  are  not  whollv  dissev- 


APPENDIX.  177 

ered,  and  tlie  sacrificing  priest  is  supposed  to 
coexist  witli  the  preaclier  and  pastor,  tlie  in- 
fluences npon  the  man  will  l)e  of  twofold  char- 
acter.    But  the  sacerdotal  is  in  its  nature  en- 
croaching, and  usually  gains  and  grows  until 
it  hecomes  predominant.     There  is  a  constant 
gravitation  toward  the  character  of  the  mere 
functionary.     The    preacher   dwindles,   wliile 
the  sacrificer  dilates.     The  sermon  is  dispar- 
aged, while  the  ceremonial  is  exhalted  ;  and 
correspondent  thercAvith  grows  the  temptation 
to  neglect  mental  ap])lication,  moral  purity, 
and  spiritual  watchfulness.     I^ow,  there  may 
be  causes  at  work    to  hinder  or  modify  the 
effect  of  these  different  systems  upon  individ- 
uals.    Some  nn'nds  are  so  energetic  and  vigoi'- 
ous  that  they  will  not  acquiesce  contentedly  in 
slavish  routine.      Some  spirits  are  so  sanctified 
and  })ure  that  tliey  will  resist  the  most  unfavor- 
able and  bemnubing  influences.      These  ])ro- 
clivities  may  be  modified  or  checked  l)y  vary- 
ing situations  and  circumstances.    I  am  speak- 
ing  of    the    innate    tendencies    of    the    two 
strongly  marked  and   contrasted  systems — the 
scrii)tural    and    the    sacerdotal    vicM's    of   the 
Christian    ministry.       The    one,    I    maintain, 
tends  to  ])roduce  the  intelligent,  large-hearted, 
spiritually-minded,    maidy  advocate  of  truth, 
the    painstaking,    sympathi/ing    ]iastoi-  ;    the 
other,  the  heartless,  ignorant,  undevout  func- 
tionary, expending    his    soul    upon    ;i    histri- 
onic  performance,    upon    washing    cups    and 
patens,  and   sti-aininir  out  ^nats.      TIkmv  mav 
12 


178  APPENDIX. 

be,  indeed,  notable  and  noble  exceptions. 
But  if  certain  qualities  are  not  needed  for  the 
discharge  of  an  office,  as  a  general  thing  they 
will  not  be  cultivated  and  developed,  and  the 
system  against  which  I  contend  conduces  in- 
evitably to  dwarf  the  scholar  and  preacher,  to 
develop  the  posturer  and  ritualist. 

Now,  let  us  glance  at  the  position  likely  to 
be  accorded  to  a  sacerdotal  class,  compared 
with  that  given  to  an  intellectual  and  godly 
ministry.  No  doubt,  where  a  comnnmity  is 
little  advanced  in  knowledge  and  culture,  the 
influence  of  the  former  will  l>e  great.  So  is 
the  influence  of  a  pagan  priest  or  an  Indian 
medicine-man.  Tlie  peasant  in  Italy  or  Rus- 
sia supposes  his  salvation  to  be  in  the  hands 
of  his  spiritual  director.  But  this  hold  upon 
darkened  and  superstitious  minds  will  diminish 
just  as  light  dawns,  and  tlie  recoil  from  exag- 
gerated reverence  to  unbelief  and  contempt  is 
sure  to  come,  sooner  or  later.  When  the  idol 
ceases  to  be  dreaded,  it  is  hurled  in  derision 
from  its  pedestal.  In  countries  comparatively 
enlightened  there  will  be  classes  predisposed 
to  admit  huge  sacerdotal  pretensions,  not  only 
the  uninformed  and  credulous,  Imt  the  imagi- 
native and  dreamy,  the  lovers  of  mystery, 
those  with  whom  religion  is  a  matter  of  taste 
and  fancy,  and  those  wlio  ])i'efer  to  be  religi- 
ous by  proxy,  and  rest  in  the  service  and  sacri- 
fice of  the  priest  to  supply  the  deficiencies  of 
the  layman.     Others,  again,  will  seek  a  refuge 


APPENDIX.  179 

from  sectarian  strife  and  controvei*8y  in  an 
ecclesiastical  sepulchre. 

But  these  classes  will  be  but  an  inconsider- 
able fraction  of  a  community  in  which  the 
Bible  is  freely  circulated,  and  wliere  intellect 
is  (juickened  and  investigation  open.  As  in- 
quirers after  truth  l)ecome  persuaded  that 
"  the  kingdom  of  (tod  is  not  meat  and  drink, 
but  rigliteousness  and  peace,  and  joy  in  the 
Holy  Ghost/'  the  claims  of  priestly  preroga- 
tive will  be  <piestioned  and  discarded.  And 
even  in  lands  where  the  system  is  in  the 
ascendant  it  is  found  that,  however  the  office 
be  blindly  reverenced,  the  individuals  who  ex- 
ercise it  are  not  very  highly  estimated.  They 
stand  upon  a  very  different  level  from  that 
occupied  by  an  unpretentious,  Christ-exalting 
ministry,  not  claiming  to  have  dominion  over 
the  faith  of  their  ])e(>ple,  but  helpers  of  their 
joy  and  watchers  for  their  souls. 

These  premises  warnmt  a  further  inference. 
As  the  ministry  is  ]>resented  maiidy  in  the 
sacerdotal  aspect,  it  will  cease  to  have  attrac- 
tions for  the  highest  order  of  mind  and  char- 
acter. To  a  young  man  of  warm  }>iety,  culti- 
vated intellect,  and  generous  aspirations,  the 
ministry  as  it  is  exhibited  in  the  Epistles  and 
in  the  life  of  such  a  man  as  Paul  the  Aj)ostle, 
and  by  those  of  like  spirit,  is  full  of  attraction. 
With  all  (»f  self-denial  and  worldly  loss  that 
are  involved,  it  staiuls  out  as  the  worthiest  and 
noblest  o('cu])ation  in  which  redeemed  man 
can  engage.      The  life  of  the  fervent  preacher 


180  APPENDIX. 

of  Christ,  the  undaunted  pleader  for  truth  and 
righteousness,  tlie  well-qualified  expounder  of 
the  divine  AVord,  the  rescuer  of  immortal 
beings  from  degradation  and  eternal  ruin,  the 
commissioned  herald  of  the  returning  Christ 
and  His  glorious  reign,  be  it  longer  or  shorter, 
peaceful  or  troublous,  is  wondrously  impres- 
sive and  inviting.  Men  of  superior  minds, 
extensive  acquirements  and  fl'attering  prospects, 
will  cheerfully  give  up  all  to  follow  the  Mastei 
in  such  a  work. 

But  there  is  little  attraction  to  such  men 
when  the  priestly  function  is  the  dominant 
idea.  The  enthusiastic  and  sentimental,  the 
lovers  of  pomp  and  ceremonial,  minds  capti- 
vated with  artistic  beauty  or  thrilled  with 
morI)id  reverence  for  ghostly  pretensions,  may 
be  captivated.  But  upon  the  sober-minded, 
clear-headed,  and  truth-loving,  the  effect  will 
be  to  repel,  not  to  attract.  A  sacerdotal  caste, 
separated  by  a  great  gulf  from  the  body  of 
Christians,  grows  narrow,  bigoted,  and  arro- 
gant, and  laymen  of  vigorous  intellects  and 
sympathizing  natures  are  not  strongly  drawn 
to  enlist  in  its  ranks. 

May  \XQ  not  perceive  a  connection  between 
the  introduction  of  such  a  theory  of  the  min- 
istry and  the  paucity  of  candidates  for  Holy 
Orders,  which  has  of  late  occasioned  so  much 
remark  and  disquietude  i  I  have  a  statement 
with  regard  to  this  diminution,  prepared  by  the 
secretary  of  '*  The  Society  for  the  Increase  of 


APPENDIX.  181 

the  Ministry. ' '     The  facts,  as  he  reports  them, 
are  as  follows  : 

' '  F ACl^    AXD    FIGURES. 

"  In  tlie  year  1830  our  Cliurcli  had  534 
clergyineu  ;  in  1840  it  had  1()2(>  ;  that  is,  at  a 
time  wlion  we  had  only  nine  bii^hops,  seven- 
teen dioceses,  and  tln-ee  yonno-,  stru<;i;ling 
theological  seminaries,  we  snceeeded  in  adding 
tifty  a  year  to  the  clergy  list,  and  doubled  the 
number  in  ten  years. 

"  In  the  next  decade,  bishops,  dioceses,  and 
seminaries  were  multiplied,  and  yet  only  sixty 
a  year  were  added,  an  increase  of  oidy  six  per 
cent  per  annum.  From  1850  to  1871,  more 
bishops,  more  dioceses,  and  more  missionary 
jurisdictions  were  made,  and  the  annual  in- 
crease of  the  clergy  came  down  to  four  per 
cent.  And  now,  in  18T<),  it  has  fallen  to  less 
than  two  per  cent.  In  other  words,  f<»rty-tive 
years  ago  ,with  oidy  five  huiidi-ed  clergy,  in  a 
])opulation  of  less  than  thirteen  millions,  we 
added  tifty  a  year,  a  percentage  which,  if  con- 
tinued, would  have  given  us  ten  thousand 
clergymen  in  187(t.  Ihit  now,  with  a  popu- 
lation three  times  as  large,  and  six  times  as 
many  bishops,  six  times  as  many  clergy,  and 
six  times  as  many  ti'aining  schools,  and  not- 
withstanding the  etVorts  of  this  and  other  edu- 
cation societies,  we  add,  not  six  times  fifty — 
that  is,  three  hundred  ministLTs  a  year — but 
only  forty-live  ;  and  our  Candidates  forOrdei's 
have  fallen  off  in  three  vears  from  four  hun- 


182  APPENDIX. 

dred  and  sixty-two  to  about  three  hundred, 
and  that,  too,  at  a  time  when  tlie  demand  for 
more  men  is  most  imperative. 

"  Now,  why  this  deplorable  falling  off  ?  Is 
it  from  want  of  interest  in  the  progress  of  the 
Church  ?  By  no  means.  For  during  all  this 
time  our  people  have  contributed  liberally  to 
missions,  foreign,  domestic,  diocesan,  and  paro- 
chial. Is  it  because  we  do  not  prize  an  edu- 
cated ministry,  and  will  not  furnish  the  means 
of  theological  education  ?  No,  not  at  all.  For 
our  money  has  been  poured  out  lavishly  for 
this  very  purpose.  To  say  nothing  of  the 
large  sums  given  to  church  colleges  hke  Trin- 
ity, Hobart,  Kenyon,  St.  Stephen's,  and  the 
University  of  the  South,  there  has  been  add- 
ed, by  donations,  legacies,  and  rise  of  prop- 
erty, to  the  endowments  of  the  three  elder 
seminaries  at  least  a  million  of  dollars  ;  and 
there  has  been  contributed  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  newer  schools,  like  Nasliotah, 
Berkeley,  Philadelphia,  Faribault,  and  Cam- 
bridge, no  less  than  two  million  five  hundred 
thousand  dollars  ;  making,  in  thirty-five  years, 
a  total  of  thirty-tive  liundred  thousand  dollars 
for  buildings,  libraries,  and  ])r(^fessorships. 
But,  notwithstanding  all  these  vast  expendi- 
tures, the  ministry  has  not  l)een  proportion- 
ately increased. "' ' 

From  this  discouraging  exliibit,  the  Rev. 
Secretary  argues  that  tlie  difficulty  lies  in  the 
limited  incomes  of  our  education  societies. 
He  says,  "  Thousands  of  young  men,  willing, 


APPENDIX.  183 

suitable,  and  devoted,  liave  been  lost  to  the 
ministry  because  tliey  could  not  ^et  the  means 
of  subsistence  while  pursuing  their  studies." 
But  this  inference  certainly  is  not  sustained  by 
the  fact  that  at  the  period  of  largest  increase 
which  he  notes,  from  1830  to  1810,  our  pres- 
ent principal  education  societies  were  not  in 
existence.  Without  questioning  the  need  and 
imj)ortauce  of  such  societies,  it  is  apparent 
from  these  statistics  that  the  difficulty  does 
not  lie  there.  From  pei-sonal  knowledge,  I 
can  l)ear  witness  that  not  oidy  did  tlie  numl)er 
of  our  ministers  ra])idly  increase  from  1880  to 
1840,  Imt  tliat  a  large  proportion  came  from 
other  })rofcssions  and  callings  ;  from  law, 
medicine,  mercantile  life,  even  from  tlie  army 
and  luivy,  ami  not  a  few  had  been  nurtured  in 
affiuence.  The  inference,  to  my  mind,  is  irre- 
sistible, that  the  ministry  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Chuj'ch  liad  attractions  tlien  which 
it  has  not  liad  since.  These  attractions  were 
not  of  a  woi'ldly  nature,  for  the  Cliurch  has 
been  since  growing  in  wealth,  as  well  as  en- 
larging its  l)or(k'rs.  Yet  its  mim'stry  lias  not 
drawn  to  itself,  in  <'<^rres})ondent  degree,  men 
of  position  and  culture,  nor  have  our  youth 
l>een  so  ready  t<>  I'l'iiounce  tem])oral  advan- 
tages and  sacrifice  worldly  interests  for  the 
salve  of  preaching  the  (ios])el  of  Christ. 

Now,  is  it  a  nu>i"e  coincidence,  M'ithout 
meaning  or  signiiicance,  that  what  is  knoAvn  as 
the  Tractarian  or  ( ).\for(l  movement  dates 
from    the   e])ocli    when   this   falling  off  is  tii-st 


184  APPENDIX. 

noticed  ?  The  decade  from  1830  to  1840  was 
a  period  of  unity  and  prosperity,  of  liopefnl 
confidence  and  growing  favor,  sncli  as  our 
Cliurcli  lias  never  known  before  or  since. 
Tlien  the  revival  of  Laudian  theology,  under 
the  specious  name  of  Church  principles,  began 
to  make  itself  felt  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic. 
One  of  the  prominent  features  of  this  system 
was  the  investing  the  Christian  ministry  with 
the  sacerdotal  character.  The  different  medi- 
aeval features  then  advocated,  witli  ill-omened 
success,  had  nearly  all  relation  to  this  assump- 
tion. Because  the  officiator  was  a  priest  in 
the  sense  of  Rome,  the  Lord's  Supper  became 
a  sacrifice,  and  the  Lord's  table  became  the 
altar,  a  designation  so  carefully  avoided  by 
our  Church  through(jut  her  Communion 
Office.  The  presln'ter,  ordained  M'ith  such 
impressions,  would  represent  his  mission  in 
words  the  reverse  of  those  used  by  the  Apos- 
tle Paul,  and  say,  "  The  Lord  sent  me  not  to 
preach  the  Gospel,  but  to  baptize  and  offer  the 
Eucharistic  sacrifice."  Ostensibly,  the  office 
was  magnified.  Greater  i-everence  was  de- 
manded. Awful  prerogatives  were  asserted. 
But,  liowever  positive  and  loudly  proclaimed, 
these  pretensions  did  not  prov'e  effectual  in  re- 
cruiting the  ministry  with  large  and  desirable 
accessions.  External  respect  and  confidence 
gave  Avay  to  wides])rea(l  distrust,  and  the  roll 
of  our  Candidates  for  Orders  sln-ank  as  popu- 
lation increased,  openings  were  multiplied, 
and  resources  were  enlarged.  Is  there  no  les- 
son for  us  here  ?     Is  not  this  experience  well 


APPENDIX.  185 

worthy  tlie  attention  of  all  lovers  of  our 
Cliiirch  ?  Put  the  facts  side  by  side.  Prior 
to  1840  our  ministry  doubled  in  ten  years. 
After  that  date,  the  theology  of  Archbishop 
Laud  supplanted,  in  the  minds  of  many  of 
our  clergy,  that  of  Cranmer  and  Ridley.  The 
idea  was  instilled  that  the  great  business  of  the 
ministry  is  to  offer  sacrifice,  administer  sacra- 
ments, and  pronounce  absolution.  Since  that 
period,  in  spite  of  new  education  societies  and 
multiplied  instrumentalities,  the  ratio  of  in- 
crease has  been  constantly  diminishing. 
Thoughtful  men  are  beginning  to  fear  that,  if 
this  state  of  things  goes  on,  the  losses  by  death, 
discipline,  and  defection  will  not  be  made  good, 
and  the  number  of  our  available  clergy  will 
decrease  instead  of  augmenting.  If  positive, 
decrease,  be  escaped  by  tilHng  the  ranks  witli 
an  inferior  class  of  men,  the  state  of  things 
will  l)e  not  better,  but  worse.  What  a  ])osi- 
tion  is  this  for  a  Church  which  ])oasts  such  a 
history,  and  which  has  been  indulging  such 
fond  anticipations  ! 

"■  O  Abnighty  God,  who  by  Thy  Son  Jesus 
Christ  didst  give  to  Tliy  apostle  Saint  Peter 
numy  excellent  gifts,  and  comnumdedst  him 
earnestly  to  feed  Thy  Hock,  make,  we  beseech 
Thee,  all  bishojjs  and  pastors  diligently  to 
preach  Thy  holy  AVord,  and  the  pe()j)le  o])edi- 
ently  to  follow  the  same,  that  they  may  re- 
ceive the  crown  of  everlasting  glory,  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen.  ' 

END. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


Form  L9-25))t-9,'47(A5618)444 


,..-..    TT"(>\U\ 


BX         Protestant  Epis- 
5175     copal^ocigty- 
P94d     for  the  Promo- 
tion of  Einan- 


"gelical  Knowledge  - 

The  doctrine  of  ttie 

IShurch  of  EnglandTT^ 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A  A   000  093  445  5 


BX 

5175 

P94d 


